Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science (한국문헌정보학회지)

Korean Society For Library And Information Science (한국문헌정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Separation of Descriptive Levels for Enhancing the Applicability of BIBFRAME

BIBFRAME 적용성 향상을 위한 기술 수준 구분에 관한 연구

  • 임수인 (중앙대학교 일반대학원 문헌정보학과) ;
  • 이승민 (중앙대학교 사회과학대학 문헌정보학과)
  • Received : 2020.08.06
  • Accepted : 2020.08.19
  • Published : 2020.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Although BIBFRAME is recognized as a new bibliographic standard that can replace the existing MARC structure, the vastness of the descriptive items shows many limitations to be applied in library communities. Thus this study proposed separating the descriptive levels of BIBFRAME as a way to enhance the applicability of BIBFRAME. The descriptive level of BIBFRAME was divided into three stages: core, standard, and detailed levels based on the bibliographic area of ISBD 2011. This separation was semantically implemented using RDF/RDFS syntax. The levels of description in BIBFRAME was defined as Class Granularity and Class Element, and the Property Relation was defined for the linkage between the Classes defined and the BIBFRAME. By applying this syntactic structure, the relationships between the BIBFRAME descriptive items separated by each descriptive level could be linked with each other. This approach is expected to ensure applicability in the creation and sharing of bibliographic data using BIBFRAME.

BIBFRAME은 기존의 MARC 구조를 대체할 수 있는 새로운 서지 표준으로 인식되고 있으나, 기술항목의 방대함으로 인해 도서관계 현장에서 실제적으로 적용하는데 있어서는 여러 가지 한계를 보이고 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 도서관 현장에서의 BIBFRAME의 적용성을 향상시키기 위한 방안으로 BIBFRAME의 기술 수준 구분을 제안하였다. BIBFRAME의 기술 수준은 ISBD 2011 통합판의 서지영역을 기준으로 핵심, 표준, 상세 수준의 3단계로 구분하였으며, RDF/RDFS 구문을 적용하여 구분한 기술 수준을 의미적으로 구현하였다. BIBFRAME의 3단계 기술 수준은 Class Granularity 및 Class Element로 정의하였으며, Property Relation을 정의하여 각각의 기술 수준으로 구분된 Class와 BIBFRAME 기술항목을 연계할 수 있는 구문적 환경을 구현하였다. 이를 통해 BIBFRAME을 이용한 서지데이터의 생성과 공유에 있어서의 적용성을 향상시킬 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Rho, Jee-Hyun. 2007. "Meanings of FRBR model in Korean library circumstance." Korean Library and Information Science Society, 38(2): 223-244.
  2. Park, Ok Nam and Oh, Jung Sun. 2014. "Deployment of BIBFRAME as a new bibliographic framework in linked data." Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science, 25(4): 235-263. https://doi.org/10.14699/kbiblia.2014.25.4.235
  3. Lee, Mihwa. 2017. "A study on the considerations in constructing BIBFRAME by analyzing BIBFRAME 2.0." Korean Library and Information Science Society, 48(4): 107-127. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.48.4.201712.107
  4. Andresen, Lief. 2018. New format: BIBFRAME in an European perspective - What would be the impact and perspective of BIBFRAME. Presentation in DET KGL. BIBLIOTEK. May 23, 2018. [online] [cited 2020. 7. 2.]
  5. Bianchini, Carlo and Guerrini, mauro. 2009. "From bibliographic models to cataloging rules: Remarks on FRBR, ICP, ISBD, and RDA and the relationships between them." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47(2): 105-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639370802561674
  6. Balster, Kevin. 2018. "BIBFRAMEing for Non-BIBFRAMErs: An introduction to current and future cataloging practices." The Serials Librarian, 74(1/4): 151-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2018.1428474
  7. Coyle, K. and Hillmann, D. 2007. Resource Description and Access (RDA). D-Lib Magazine, 13(1/2). [online] [cited 2020. 7. 1.]
  8. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). 2011. International Standard Bibliographic Description: Consolidated Edition.
  9. Joint Steering Committee for the Revision of Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules. 2008. RDA: Resource Description and Access: Prospectus.
  10. Library of Congress, Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control. 2008. On the record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the future of bibliographic control.
  11. Library of Congress. 2016. BIBFRAME frequently asked questions. [online] [cited 2020. 6. 15.]
  12. LIBRIS. 2017. BIBFRAME in Libris XL. [online] [cited 2020. 7. 5.]
  13. Park, Jung-Ran, Brenza, Andrew and Richards, Lori. 2020. BIBFRAME linked data: A conceptual study on the prevailing content standards and data model. In Linked Open Data: Applications, trends and future developments. [online] [cited 2020. 7. 6.]
  14. Picco, Paola and Repiso, Virginia Ortiz. 2012. "The contribution of FRBR to the identification of bibliographic relationships: The new RDA-based ways of representing relationships in catalogs." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 50(5/7): 622-640. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.680847
  15. Sprochi, Amanda. 2016. "Where are we headed? Resource Description and Access, Bibliographic Framework, and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Library Reference Model." International Information & Library Review, 48(2): 129-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2016.1176455
  16. Tharani, K. 2015. "Linked data in libraries: A case study of harvesting and sharing bibliographic metadata with BIBFRAME." Information Technology and Libraries, 34(1): 5-19. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v34i1.5664
  17. Yang, Sharon Q. and Lee, Yan Yi. 2016. Six years after RDA: Projects, initiatives, trends and directions. Presentation in New Jersey Library Association annual Conference, May 17, 2016.
  18. Zou, Xiaozhu et al. 2018. "Constructing metadata schema of scientific and technical report based on FRBR." Computer and Information Science, 11: 34-39. https://doi.org/10.5539/cis.v11n2p34