Download to read offline
![Group 2 Entities
“…responsible for the intellectual or artistic
content, the physical production and
dissemination, or the custodianship of the
entities…” in Group 1
Person
Corporate body
[Family]
4/13/2006
Indiana Library Federation Annual10
Conference](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/frbrilf-131222183249-phpapp01/85/De-Mystifying-FRBR-A-Whirlwind-Introduction-10-320.jpg)
![End-users
Grouping and disambiguation of search
results [example]
Better distinction between versions
Better support for browsing, discovery of
previously unknown items
ILL
Holds
4/13/2006
Indiana Library Federation Annual23
Conference](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/frbrilf-131222183249-phpapp01/85/De-Mystifying-FRBR-A-Whirlwind-Introduction-23-320.jpg)
More Related Content
Similar to De-Mystifying FRBR: A Whirlwind Introduction
De-Mystifying FRBR: A Whirlwind Introduction
- 1. De-Mystifying FRBR: A WhirlwindIntroduction Jenn Riley Metadata Librarian IU Digital Library Program jenlrile@indiana.edu 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual Conference 1
- 2. Agenda Introduction to FRBR LCproposals for fitting FRBR into existing record structures Why you should care 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual2 Conference
- 3. Agenda Introduction to FRBR LCproposals for fitting FRBR into existing record structures Why you should care 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual3 Conference
- 4. What is FRBR? FunctionalRequirements for Bibliographic Records Either F-R-B-R or “Ferber” Outlined in a 1997/1998 report from IFLA A “conceptual model” entities attributes relationships 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual4 Conference
- 5. Contents of FRBRReport Introduction Objectives, Scope, and Methodology Entities Attributes Relationships User Tasks Basic Requirements for National Bibliographic Records 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual5 Conference
- 6. User Tasks FRBR Find Identify Select Obtain Cutter To enablea person to find a book of which either ...is known To show what the library has by a given author on a given subject in a given kind of literature To assist in the choice of a book 4/13/2006 the author the title the subject as to its edition (bibliographically) as to its character (literary or topical) Indiana Library Federation Annual6 Conference
- 7. Group 1 Entities WORK “adistinct intellectual an expression of a work” “the physical embodiment of or artistic creation” “a single exemplar of a manifestation” “the intellectual or artistic realization of a work” is realized through EXPRESSION is embodied in w1 Franz Schubert's Trout quintet w1 Harry Lindgren's Geometric dissections w1 Ronald Hayman's Playback -e1 the composer's score -e1 the author's text Geometric -e1 original text entitlededited for -e2 a performance by the Amadeus dissections publication Hephzibah Menuhin on Quartet and -m1 the book published in 1973 by piano -m1 the book published in 1964by Van Davis-Poynter -e3 Nostrand a performance by the Cleveland -e2 revised Yo-Yo Ma onRecreational Quartet and copy autographed by the -i1 text entitled the cello problems in geometric dissections .... -. . .author . -m1 the book published in 1972 by Dover 4/13/2006 MANIFESTATION is exemplified by ITEM Indiana Library Federation Annual7 Conference
- 8. Not always clearwhere a real-world situation falls New preface New illustrations Braille Screenplay Serials Aggregations 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual8 Conference
- 9. Expression entity uncertainty FRBRreport, p. 19: “Strictly speaking, any change in intellectual or artistic content constitutes a change in expression. Thus, if a text is revised or modified, the resulting expression is considered to be a new expression, no matter how minor the modification may be.” “On a practical level, the degree to which bibliographic distinctions are made between variant expressions of a work will depend to some extent on the nature of the work itself, and on the anticipated needs of users.” Expression entity working group now formed 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual9 Conference
- 10. Group 2 Entities “…responsiblefor the intellectual or artistic content, the physical production and dissemination, or the custodianship of the entities…” in Group 1 Person Corporate body [Family] 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual10 Conference
- 11. Group 3 Entities Subjectsof Works Groups 1 & 2 entities Concept Object Event Place 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual11 Conference
- 12. FRANAR Functional Requirements andNumbering of Authority Records IFLA Working Group Released FRAR report in 2005 Companion document to FRBR Discusses cataloging process more than entity-relationship analysis 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual12 Conference
- 13. Agenda Introduction to FRBR LCproposals for fitting FRBR into existing record structures Why you should care 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual13 Conference
- 14. Possible FRBR applications ScenarioA - Now Authority Work/ Expression Uniform Title Bibliographic Holding Person Series (work/expression) Uniform Title Concept Manifestation Item
- 15. Scenario B Authority Person/ Corporate body Work/ Expression Uniform Title Bibliographic Holding Person/ Corporate body Series (work/expression) Uniform Title Concept Manifestation Item *FRBR recordstructure slides are from Barbara Tillett’s May 2005 presentation at the OCLC FRBR Workshop
- 16. Scenario C Authority Person/ Corporate body Person/ Corporate body Concept Bibliographic Holding Work/ Expression Uniform Title Series (work/expression) Uniform Title Manifestation Item *FRBR recordstructure slides are from Barbara Tillett’s May 2005 presentation at the OCLC FRBR Workshop
- 17. Scenario D Authority Person/ Corporate body Work/ Expression Uniform Title Holding Person/ Corporate body Series (work/expression) Uniform Title Concept Manifestation/ Item *FRBR recordstructure slides are from Barbara Tillett’s May 2005 presentation at the OCLC FRBR Workshop
- 18. Scenario E Authority Person/ Corporate body Person/ Corporate body Concept Bibliographic Holding Series (work/expression) Uniform Title Work/ Expression Uniform Title Manifestation/ Item *FRBR recordstructure slides are from Barbara Tillett’s May 2005 presentation at the OCLC FRBR Workshop
- 19. New record structures Nodecisions made yet about the best way to proceed within MARC Any changes will be phased in over time Any changes will represent steep challenges both to ILS vendors and to implementing libraries Any changes will be made with user functionality as a prime consideration 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual19 Conference
- 20. Agenda Introduction to FRBR LCproposals for fitting FRBR into existing record structures Why you should care 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual20 Conference
- 21. How many recordsare affected? Average work has 1.5 manifestations 78% of works have a single manifestation ~99% of all works in WorldCat have seven manifestations or less ~30,000, or ~1% have more than 20 manifestations R. Bennett et. al. (2003) "The concept of a work in WorldCat: an application of FRBR" Library Collections Acquisitions & Technical Services 27, 45-59. So why do we need FRBR? 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual21 Conference
- 22. 4/13/2006 Indiana Library FederationAnnual22 Conference
- 23. End-users Grouping and disambiguationof search results [example] Better distinction between versions Better support for browsing, discovery of previously unknown items ILL Holds 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual23 Conference
- 24. RDA & FRBR “TheFRBR and FRAR models provide RDA with an underlying framework that has the scope needed to support comprehensive coverage of all types of content and media, the flexibility and extensibility needed to accommodate newly emerging resource characteristics, and the adaptability needed for the data produced to function within a wide range of technological environments.” 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual24 Conference
- 25. Other cataloging changes Non-MARCenvironments Many already doing FRBR-like things Tend to have lots of programming support MARC environments Need more innovation from ILS vendors Catalogers used to looking at 1 record (well, 2 records) showing everything Need to provide complex relationships when necessary, hide when not Supporting legacy records will be complicated 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual25 Conference
- 26. Perspectives from the2005 ALCTS FRBR ALA Preconference Glenn Patton (OCLC) Clearer understanding of why we do what we do Better collocation and navigation Clearer, more useful relationships More controlled, authoritative information for productivity Jennifer Bowen (Rochester): “Is FRBR really coming? It’s already here!” 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual26 Conference
- 27. Some implementations &related projects OCLC FictionFinder and Curioser RLG RedLightGreen AustLit Gateway VTLS Virtua ILS system III Millennium 2005 ILS system IU Variations2 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual27 Conference
- 28. So what doI do now? Learn more! 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual28 Conference
- 29. For further information FRBRreport Readings on handout FRBR listserv FRBR blog jenlrile@indiana.edu These presentation materials: <http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/~jenlrile/presentations/ilf2006/> 4/13/2006 Indiana Library Federation Annual29 Conference
Editor's Notes
- #15 <number> When we catalog, we start with an item we have at hand. From it we construct a bibliographic record that is intended to describe the manifestation, that is any copy held anywhere, so the record can be re-used by others in a shared cataloging environment. We also make authority records to control the way we identify works and expressions that are embodied in the manifestation we are describing, and that in turn may be linked to a name authority record for the person or corporate body that is responsible for creating the work or expression. In some integrated library systems this link between the bib and authority records is real, which also makes database maintenance and global update changes easier than when these links are not present.
- #16 <number> Here’s a scenario for the future, where we would make use of authority records for works and expressions and do more linking directly at the authority record level for the classification and subject headings that are appropriate to the work. Those authority records would also be available to display for each linked bib record, and we could save cataloger’s time by not needing to classify and provide subject headings for all the manifestations of that same work/expression combination. For the location, call number for the items, We’d still need to cutter for the individual item or copy we were adding, but that would be a lot simpler than all the other subject cataloging work that is now done. The item information for inventory control, circulation, interlibrary loan, etc. would be entered as part of the holdings record and would reflect the call number for the copy held locally. I really like this model, but we need to experiment to see if this is best or perhaps there is a better implementation model for FRBR. This model will require some changes to the authority record – to include 65X’s for the subject headings – we already have a field for classification.
- #17 <number> Here’s another scenario, where we could use the bib records for works and expressions, link the subjects or even use the 650’s in bib records as we can now, but somehow get our local systems to use the linked work/expression records as part of the displays when we view the manifestation records… This model, in my view is not really ideal… It would take a lot of work on the part of vendors to know how to display the linked work/expression records with the related bib records.
- #18 <number> Here’s yet another scenario for the future, where we would use the MARC holdings record to capture all of the data elements (attributes) of the manifestation and items – that is, the physical characteristics – the physical media, publisher, distributor, manufacturer information relevant to the recording of the content. Attaching holdings records to authority records should not be a giant programming job, but many current integrated library systems avoid authority records altogether, which is a pity. The potential in the future for using the authority record and its ability to cluster the variant names given to things and to link to specific resources, opens up tremendous flexibility to meet future user demands. This might be particularly interesting for serials. The title of a serial is a controlled access point. Logically that would be in an authority record. But there is also the manifestation aspect of the physical format of any given serial and various attributes associated with the manifestation – its publisher, its numbering and dates, its physical medium (microform, digital online or a tangible digital object like a CD-ROM) and mode of issuance (e.g., successively issued or integrating resource) – we now put the manifestation information in bibliographic records And the item information may be in both bibliographic records or holdings in the MARC format and item records in local systems. If we had a clear way of identifying the attributes for a particular work/expression/ manifestation/item combination, we could theoretically combine all such combinations for the same work in a single record, and just display the needed elements as the application or user specified. There are many ways this could work.
- #19 <number> Here’s yet another scenario – a variation from the last where we’d use the bib record again for the work/expression record…and the holdings record for manifestations and items…but this has the same drawbacks as Scenario C.. A lot of this depends on vendors to come up with system designs and for cataloging rules to be clear about needed entities and attributes and relationships – which brings us back to FRBR and cataloging rules.