1. BIBFRAME Update Session  Library of Congress pilot and development  Beacher Wiggins – Pilot project  Sally McCallum – Vocabulary development  A supplier’s approach to BIBFRAME/Linked Data  Tiziana Possemato, Casalini libre  Linked Data for Production (LD4P) proposed projects  Archives and annotations – Jennifer Baxmeyer, Princeton  Art and museums – Melanie Wacker and Amber Billey, Columbia  Rare books and hip hop LPs – Chiat Naun Chew, Cornell  OCLC update  John Chapman, OCLC  Zepheira update  Eric Miller, Zepheira

2. Sally McCallum Library of Congress smcc@loc.gov Vocabulary Redevelopment

3. Vocabulary redevelopment  Vocabulary BIBFRAME 1.0 published in 2014  Developed from elements in RDA, MARC, AACR  MARC to 1.0 conversion tools made available  Other tools developed: BF Editor, Profile editor, Search http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/tools/  Research and discussion papers: Authorities, Relationships, Profiles, Annotations, AV Report  Listserv discussions  Expert review and advice

4. Leading up to …  Improved BIBFRAME vocabulary – 2.0  Proposal papers for key points http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/index.html Titles Events Agents and roles Items Identifiers and Notes Categories Administrative metadata Classes for types External lists Events more formally modeled

5. Basic model revision?  Holding Annotation  Item  Authority  Agents and Concepts  Agents (persons, families, organizations, meetings, jurisdictions)  Concepts (topics, places, times, events, works)  Issues Must accommodate standardized labels, free-text labels, real world objects, abstract concepts Naming issue: Identities? Entities? Broader term?

6. RDF principles in BIBFRAME  Resource Description Format (RDF)  Art (practicality) vs. rules?  Practical examples  Make a clear distinction between Datatype (literal) and Object (resource) properties  Enable supplying URI, label (literal), or both  Distinguish types by class  Define reciprocal properties, if appropriate  Use rdfs:label and rdf:value properties  Avoid proliferation of properties, abstract classes and properties, and over constraining  Separate administrative metadata from descriptive data  Consider using external vocabularies where “wise” (stable, widely used, standard) or enable future adoption

7. Property naming conventions  More practicality vs. rules  Rules? Property name must be a noun if expected value is a literal? Property name must be a verb if expected value is a resource?  Reality “has” and “is” may be implied – hasTitle or title? Nouns if clearly expresses property – title, subject Noun phrases allowed – copyOf Present tense verbs preferred – accompanies Verb phrases allowed – identifiedBy Prepositional phrases allowed – continuesInPart

8. Current and future  Proposal for vocabulary 2.0  Model, principles, naming, MARC mapping  Tool reengineering  For LC - Pilot 2 with vocab 2.0  LC’s LD4P projects  Continuing exploration for different media  AudioVisual: new report on technical metadata published last week http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/pdf/bf-avtechstudy-01-04- 2016.pdf http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/pdf/bf-avtechstudy-01-04- 2016.pdf How much technical metadata is needed in bibliographic descriptions for end user access?