A weblog following developments around the world in FRBR: Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records.

Maintained by William Denton, Web Librarian at York University. Suggestions and comments welcome at wtd@pobox.com.


Confused? Try What Is FRBR? (2.8 MB PDF) by Barbara Tillett, or Jenn Riley's introduction. For more, see the basic reading list.

Books: FRBR: A Guide for the Perplexed by Robert Maxwell (ISBN 9780838909508) and Understanding FRBR: What It Is and How It Will Affect Our Retrieval Tools edited by Arlene Taylor (ISBN 9781591585091) (read my chapter FRBR and the History of Cataloging).

Calendar

August 2005
M T W T F S S
« Jul   Sep »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

July highlights

Posted by: William Denton, 10 August 2005 7:47 am
Categories: Highlights

I announced this weblog on 26 June, so July was its first full month. I posted on twenty-three days, much of which was rounding up existing stuff and pointing out useful sites and papers that you probably already knew about. Here are what I think are the best entries, by which I mean the ones that point to the most interesting or freshest work:

If you ever want to suggest something, please send me some e-mail. You’re always welcome to leave comments, too. Keep those cards and letters coming in.


Paper on Australian National Bibliographic Database

Posted by: William Denton, 9 August 2005 7:23 am
Categories: Implementations,Papers

I missed pointing this out with the other Australian and AustLit stuff: The Australian National Bibliographic Database and the Functional Requirements for the Bibliographic Database (FRBR), by Bemal Rajapatirana and Roxanne Missingham, ALJ: the Australian Library Journal, February 2005, 54 (1): 31-42.

Methodology

To investigate the records on the ANBD which were related under the FRBR model two tests were devised. Two different algorithms were considered. The Library of Congress FRBR Display Tool was selected for these tests. The OCLC algorithm was not selected as it was not available at the time in a form that could be used to test a data file in this manner.

The first test was to identify the 100 most commonly occurring uniform and name-title index entries, in essence the 100 most commonly occurring work headings. Linked bibliographic records were then extracted and fed through the LC display tool. Once this was done, analysis occurred to extrapolate the number of records (or manifestations) per work, quantify missed items and identify any material type trends in the result set. The data collection included the complete set of bibliographic records pertaining to all works as well as sample subsets of records relating to single works. They were then processed with the LC display tool in order to compare the affects by analysing the results across specific genres.


Bibliotheca Universalis: conference this week

Posted by: William Denton, 8 August 2005 7:44 am
Categories: Conferences,IFLA

Bibliotheca Universalis: How to Organize Chaos? is a satellite meeting going on this Thursday and Friday before the annual IFLA conference that starts Saturday. It is meant “to extend the present FRBR and FRAR situation outside the circle of the enthusiasts, and show the significant potentials in sharing information through the FRBR ideas. In the seminar, the background and many practical implementations will be presented.” It sounds great and I wish I was there in Finland. The program of events and presentations includes presentations titled:

  • To the Basics: Is It Possible to Organise All Information?
  • Metadata in Relation to FRBR
  • Structuring the Catalogue According to FRBR User Tasks: Collocation and Linking
  • Bibliotheca Universalis, the creation of Conrad Gessner (1516-1565), Father of Bibliography and Monster of Science

If slides or papers from the conference are put online, I’ll be sure to link to them. Anything about implementations would be especially interesting. Attendees are welcome to leave comments!


Four questions: Patrick Le Boeuf

Posted by: William Denton, 5 August 2005 7:30 am
Categories: Four Questions

Today I debut a new feature: Four FRBR Questions. Every now and then I’ll ask these questions of people in the FRBR world and post the answers here. There are some really interesting people doing work in this area, and this will let us get to know them better.

The first person I asked was, naturally, Patrick Le Boeuf, chair of the FRBR Review Group, keeper of the bibliography, and owner of the mailing list (see links on left). You’ve read his papers, seen the issue of Cataloging & Classification Quarterly he edited, and you may have met him at a conference. I asked for just a one-sentence answer to each of the questions — he’s a very busy man, even more so than usual with an IFLA meeting starting next week — but he was extremely generous and gave much longer answers that are fascinating reading. I thank him very much for this, and for all his FRBR work!

When did you first hear about FRBR?

From 1994 to 1998 I was a cataloguer for sound recordings at Bibliothèque nationale de France. At that time, we used to create very complete descriptions for CDs, to the level of each individual track (unfortunately, the cataloging policy of the BnF department for audiovisual materials has changed now, and CD descriptions now are so poor that they are virtually of no use). It is a habit, in sound recordings industry, to reorganize the same individual tracks into various combinations that are released and re-released over time. I went tired of cataloguing the same tracks over and over again, especially in jazz music, with various levels of precision and accuracy according to the more or less important amount of seriousness of music publishers (liner notes are sometimes very detailed, sometimes very rough, for the very same track). I began therefore to think that it would be a good idea to create some kind of authority records for sound tracks (at the conceptual level of ISRC), and to make links from bibliographic records to such authority records in order to describe the contents of sound recordings and to have that information indexed and retrievable. Then, in 1998, I changed jobs and was in charge of authority files for uniform titles for music, in a department that was headed by Nadine Boddaert (the compiler of Anonymous Classics: A List of Uniform Headings for European Literature (PDF, 1600 KB)), who was at the time a member of the IFLA Cataloguing Section’s Standing Committee. She introduced me to FRBR. It was a revelation. I immediately thought: “This is precisely what cataloguers for sound recordings urgently need!” One year later, I changed jobs again, and I entered the department for standardization. There, I was asked to translate the “FRBR Final Report” into French, which I began to do enthusiastically.

What’s your involvement with it now?

At the moment I am chair of the IFLA FRBR Review Group, but I will have to resign from that position this summer. I am also a member of the “FRBR/CIDOC CRM Harmonization Working Group,” which aims at translating the FRBR entity-relationship model into the object-oriented formalism, so that it can be “plugged” to the CIDOC CRM model developed by the museum community. I intend to go on working on that topic, even though I may have to leave the National Library of France in the near future, which may make it more difficult for me. But I am profoundly convinced that this task (converting FRBR to OO and transforming it into something closer to an actual ontology) is too important to be abandoned now.

What’s one thing you think the FRBR world needs most?

I don’t know. Perhaps, to stop discussing the “Expression” entity over and over again. Expression is not the most problematic entity in the model. Work and Manifestation pose much trickier problems. At least at a conceptual level. At the pragmatic, operational level, however, I agree that some decisions need to be made about what to include in the notion of Expression.

What’s your one-line non-librarian description of FRBR?

“What do you mean when you say ‘a book’? Do you mean the physical thing with ink-covered sheets of paper and a binding (‘to tear a book into pieces’), or a publication (‘to order a book’), or a text (‘to write a book’), or the immaterial content of a text (‘to be impressed by a book’)?” The inconvenience of that description is that, when someone simply says “I’m reading a book”, the sentence refers to all four levels at the same time…


FRAR draft

Posted by: William Denton, 3 August 2005 7:18 am
Categories: FRAD,IFLA,Specifications

Glenn Patton sent word to the FRBR mailing list that a draft of the Functional Requirements for Authority Records specification is available. That’s FRAR. FRANAR is Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records, and the IFLA group doing all this is the Working Group on FRANAR. It’s a bit confusing.

What’s an authority record? The document says at the start:

For the purposes of this study, an authority record is defined as the aggregate of information about an entity whose name is used as a controlled access point for bibliographic citations or records in a library catalogue or bibliographic file. The authority record normally contains the authorized or preferred form for the access point as established by the library, as well as variant forms and related access points used as references. In addition, the authority record may contain information pertaining to the entity associated with the access point (i.e., the person, corporate body, work, concept, etc. represented by the access point) as well as to relationships between that entity and other entities represented by related access points. The authority record will also normally include information identifying the rules under which the access point was established, the sources consulted, the cataloguing agency responsible for establishing the access point, etc.

It’s the thing that keeps Richard Burton the explorer separate from Richard Burton the actor in a library catalogue, and stops you from thinking one of Elizabeth Taylor’s husbands made a secret visit to Mecca in 1853.

FRAR and FRBR are closely tied together and you’ll want to read this. Comments are open until late October.


Expression of FRBR Concepts in RDF

Posted by: William Denton, 2 August 2005 7:22 am
Categories: Semantic Web,Specifications,W3C

Ian Davis and Richard Newman are using RDF to show the relationships in FRBR:

Richard Newman posted an entry on his blog about it, and Ian Davis posted an explanation on his blog too:

This one I’m less sure about but I think it could be significant. In the Web Architecture what we call a Resource, FRBR would call a Work. Each Representation of that Resource is an Expression of that Work. In other words the HTML and XML versions of a particular page are different Expressions of that page. When a Web browser requests a particular Expression it gets a snapshot of it at a point in time, this is a Manifestation. The Web Architecture doesn’t name this explicitly but it is implicit in some of the HTTP negotiation that goes on around character sets and ranges. The actual bytes that are transmitted and end up on my hard disk are the Item relating to this Manifestation.

This is why I’m pretty excited to have the opportunity to work on something like FRBR. I think it’s going to be a core referent for many other schemas and will enable a base level of common vocabulary between disparate systems. I want to see MusicBrainz, AudioScrobbler, IMDB, Creative Commons, Amazon and so many others using it to describe their catalogues and metadata in a f[r]eely interchangeable fashion!

So do I. Have a look at their work and send them comments, if you have any.


Semantic web + FRBR + union catalogue

Posted by: William Denton, 1 August 2005 7:56 am
Categories: Papers,W3C

An Argument for a Semantic Web Based FRBR Union Catalogue, by Jillian C. Wallis, is a shortish paper done in 2004 for Phil Agre‘s course Information Retrieval Systems at UCLA (there are useful links about the Semantic Web there).

Abstract. IFLA’s FRBR is a semantic expression of the relationships between items in the library catalog. The web technologies currently being developed by the W3C could be used to implement these expressions. A new layer would need to be developed on top of the MARC XML layer, to aggregate all of the holdings and descriptive data into a new union catalogue. Thus, the FRBR data could then live in this layer and give the library catalog the new functionality required by FRBR.

Stuff about FRBR and the Semantic Web is interesting. Now, I’m no cataloguer, but I think people would argue with the line that says union catalogues require MARC records and a transmission standard to move the records: MARC is the transmission standard (unless you’re talking IP or tape or sneakernet). I don’t know how commonly MARCXML is being adopted, either, but that’s neither here nor there. The comments about using XML schemas to represent the information about relationships that FRBR requires are interesting.


« Previous Page