Gordon - You wrote: " The ISBD Review Group decided the other framework vocabularies did not apply, when it first looked at alignment between the proposed ISBD area 0 terms during the development of the final consolidated edition. If you can give me a single example where they do, I am happy to augment the mapping tables."
and my point was, they do not apply and neither do those categories that I cited that were included on the tables. It still makes no sense to me, but clearly you need them for some purpose (for some future programmer?).
Additionally, I understand why you chose to map to a theoretical framework rather than trying (impossibly) to map directly between RDA terms and ISBD terms, but I think the main thing this exercise points out is the great need to have more discussions between the ISBD Review Group and the JSC to try to resolve the differences. Your work really helps! - Barbara
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 10:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]; Tillett, Barbara; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: [DC-RDA] ISBD to RDA/ONIX mapping
Barbara
The tables give mappings between the ISBD vocabulary terms and RDA/ONIX framework base content and carrier categories. A base content category contains a value taken from each of the four exhaustive vocabularies (Character, Sensory Mode, Image Movement, Image Dimensionality) specified in the framework, while a base carrier category contains a value taken from each of the three exhaustive vocabularies (Intermediation Tool, Storage Medium, Housing Format) specified in the framework. As outlined in the methodology discussed at the JSC/ISBD meeting, each of these framework vocabularies will be represented as a separate RDF value vocabulary.
The table columns show the ISBD term mapped to the values from the framework; where a column is blank, there is no valid mapping. A blank cell in any row immediately indicates that the ISBD term cannot map to a full base category. This is important, as all of the RDA terms are guaranteed to map to a full base category. A blank cell thus indicates that a) that there can be no exact or near-equivalent mapping betwen the ISBD term and an RDA term, and b) what is missing in the definition/semantic of the ISBD term that would result in a direct mapping.
As indicated in the methodology document, these blank mappings will not be instantiated, and it is expected that absence of a mapping from an ISBD term to a framework vocabulary will be easily detectable programmatically.
The ISBD Review Group decided the other framework vocabularies did not apply, when it first looked at alignment between the proposed ISBD area 0 terms during the development of the final consolidated edition. If you can give me a single example where they do, I am happy to augment the mapping tables.
We will definitely have a chance to discuss this further in London, as the mapping is on the agenda of the Bibliographic Metadata Task Group meeting, which will be circulated shortly.
Cheers
Gordon
On 16 April 2012 at 13:30 "Tillett, Barbara" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> sharing the draft. I hope my comments will find their way to the
> appropriate persons, if you two are not the correct people. You asked
> that we respond to the Dublin Core list, but hopefully the IFLA folks
> also will get the information. These are my own personal opinions.
>
> 1. The Tables. I do not understand why a column is used for the
> tables when there is no information in any of the cells beneath it
> (storage medium and housing format on Table 5; sensory mode and image
> movement on table 4; sensory mode and image dimensionality on table 3;
> image movement and image dimensionality on table 2). Why include an
> RDA/ONIX Framework category, if it doesn't apply for that ISBD
> category? I understood the note on negative values, but this seems
> there are no values at all
>
> There were several other categories for the RDA/ONIX Framework that
> are not shown at all (extension mode, extension requirement,
> extension termination, interaction, revision mode, revision
> requirement), so presumably someone decided they did not apply?
>
> 2. RDA/ONIX Framework. I find the RDA/ONIX Framework terms and
> categories in need of review - as is planned between the two parties,
> the JSC (Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA) and the
> publishing community, who created it, hopefully in the next several months.
>
> Wouldn’t it be a useful step at this "early" stage to harmonize ISBD
> and RDA as the JSC and publishers re-open discussions with the
> publishing community? Going in such different directions does not
> seem helpful to international standardization efforts, and it is not
> clear why ISBD chose to take such a divergent approach. Perhaps such
> harmonization discussion would enable us to jointly agree on a better
> approach. Gordon's analysis has certainly enlightened us all about
> the difficulties with the current approach.
>
> I also will be at the London meeting and look forward to talking further.
>
> - Barbara Tillett (not acting in any official capacity for this
> message - these are my personal views)
>
> P.S.: One of my staff suggested the mapping document should include
> examples for area 0. - bt
>
> From: List for discussion on application profiles and mappings
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Françoise Leresche
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 10:44 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [DC-RDA] ISBD to RDA/ONIX mapping
>
>
>
> Dear colleagues
>
> Please find attached a document providing the mappings between the
> ISBD area 0 vocabularies and the RDA/ONIX Framework vocabularies
> prepared by the ISBD/XML Study Group of IFLA Cataloguing Section.
> Please note it provides mappings to base category attributes only.
>
> I am forwarding this document to the DCMI Bibliographic Metadata Task
> Group for review and comment. Please post any comment to the DC-RDA
> list < [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >.
>
> Mirna Willer, chair of the ISBD Review group, and I will attend the
> inaugural meeting of the DCMI Bibliographic Metadata Task Group in
> London, where we shall have the opportunity to discuss the mappings face-to-face.
>
> Best regards
>
> Françoise Leresche
> Chair of the ISBD/XML Study Group
>
> Françoise Leresche
> Bibliothèque nationale de France
> Département de l'information bibliographique et numérique Responsable
> du Pôle Modélisation fonctionnelle
>
> Tél. : (33) 1 53 79 86 29
> Fax : (33) 1 53 79 85 86
> Mél. : [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>
> Adoptez un livre ! <http://www.amisbnf.org/books.html>
> Avant d'imprimer, pensez à l'environnement.
>
|
