Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules
Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules were an international library cataloging standard. First published in 1967 and edited by C. Sumner Spalding, a second edition edited by Michael Gorman and Paul W. Winkler was issued in 1978, with subsequent revisions appearing in 1988 and 1998. Published jointly by the American Library Association, the Canadian Library Association, the UK Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals, the rules were designed for the construction of library catalogs and similar bibliographic tools; the rules cover the physical description of library resources, as well as the provision of name and title access points. AACR2 was issued in several print versions, including a concise edition, as well as an online version. Various translations were available. Principles of AACR included cataloguing based on the item'in hand' rather than inferring information from external sources and the concept of the'chief source of information', preferred where conflicts exist. Despite the claim to be'Anglo-American', the first edition of AACR was published in 1967 in somewhat distinct North American and British texts.
The second edition of 1978 unified the two sets of rules and brought them in line with the International Standard Bibliographic Description. Libraries wishing to migrate from the previous North American text were obliged to implement'desuperimposition', a substantial change in the form of headings for corporate bodies. While the 2002 updates included substantial improvements to AACR's treatment of non-book materials, the proliferation of 21st century formats in a networked environment and the rise of electronic publishing signaled the necessity for significant change in the cataloging code. Plans for a third edition were abandoned in 2005; the international cataloging community turned its attention to drafting a new standard to succeed AACR. Informed by the work of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, the new framework was crafted to be more flexible and suitable for use in a digital environment: Resource Description and Access was released in June 2010.
The Library of Congress, National Library of Medicine, National Agricultural Library, several national libraries of other English-speaking countries performed a formal test of RDA, resulting in a June 2011 report of findings. MARC standards AACR2 JSC A Brief History of AACR RDA: Resource Description and Access Prospectus ALCTS Newsletter article on RDA Cataloger's Desktop
Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data known as Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records, is a conceptual entity-relationship model developed by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions and published in 2010. It is a continuation of the work done on the FRBR model, detailing how "entities that serve as subjects of intellectual or artistic endeavor" can be related and controlled within the bibliographic universe; the model is intended to support global reuse of subject authority data. Work is a "distinct intellectual or artistic creation. Is anything that can be the subject of a work; this is the abstract idea of the aboutness of a given work. Thema is independent of language and disciplines. Any alphanumeric, visual, or any other symbol, sign or combination of symbols by which a thema is known, referred to or addressed. A nomen can be any expression of a thema. Ideally there will exist an authority file with every possible subject/thema; this means.
If a user looks up a specific subject in a catalog and wants to look in other places, he or she should not have to worry about translating the query, since the system would be able to recognize the underlying thema and automatically translate it into the relevant nomen. One way to understand this is to think about. For example, if one looks at a work about the city Stockholm, the capital of Sweden, there are many ways to describe Stockholm. First, one must distinguish between the many other meanings of the word; when the thema is established in an authority file, it is possible to translate across systems. The nomen for Stockholm could be anything from "Stockholm", "Stockholm", "Tukholma" - the Finnish spelling of Stockholm - or a range of Zip-codes, or the longitude and latitude, or a picture of the city, or a sound. FRSAR, if implemented, enables users to perform specific and precise subject searching across multiple systems. Works and themas have a many-to-many relationship, meaning that any work can have more than one subject, any subject can be expressed in one or more works.
The same is true for the relationship between nomen. A thema can be expressed in many different ways and a nomen can express many different themas, all depending on the given system. Besides these relationships, the workgroup has so far identified several other thema-thema and nomen-nomen relationships. Two nomens can, for example, be said to have an equivalence relationship, if they both are appellations of the same thema; the workgroup conducted two user studies in 2006 and 2007, based on the results of these studies, four subject authority data user tasks were defined: Find: to find an entity or set of entities corresponding to stated criteria Identify: to identify an entity based on certain attributes / characteristics Select: to select an entity Explore: to explore any relationships between entities, correlations to other subject vocabularies and structure of a subject domain Functional Requirements for Authority Data FRBRoo Zeng, Žumer, Salaba, eds.. Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data: A Conceptual Model.
Final Report Approved by the Standing Committee of the IFLA Section on Indexing. Žumer and Zeng. Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records: A Conceptual Model of Aboutness. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries, Vietnam, December 10-13, 2007. Berlin: Springer. Doi:10.1007/978-3-540-77094-7_62
Integrated Authority File
The Integrated Authority File or GND is an international authority file for the organisation of personal names, subject headings and corporate bodies from catalogues. It is used for documentation in libraries and also by archives and museums; the GND is managed by the German National Library in cooperation with various regional library networks in German-speaking Europe and other partners. The GND falls under the Creative Commons Zero licence; the GND specification provides a hierarchy of high-level entities and sub-classes, useful in library classification, an approach to unambiguous identification of single elements. It comprises an ontology intended for knowledge representation in the semantic web, available in the RDF format; the Integrated Authority File became operational in April 2012 and integrates the content of the following authority files, which have since been discontinued: Name Authority File Corporate Bodies Authority File Subject Headings Authority File Uniform Title File of the Deutsches Musikarchiv At the time of its introduction on 5 April 2012, the GND held 9,493,860 files, including 2,650,000 personalised names.
There are seven main types of GND entities: LIBRIS Virtual International Authority File Information pages about the GND from the German National Library Search via OGND Bereitstellung des ersten GND-Grundbestandes DNB, 19 April 2012 From Authority Control to Linked Authority Data Presentation given by Reinhold Heuvelmann to the ALA MARC Formats Interest Group, June 2012
An entity–relationship model describes interrelated things of interest in a specific domain of knowledge. A basic ER model is composed of entity types and specifies relationships that can exist between entities. In software engineering, an ER model is formed to represent things a business needs to remember in order to perform business processes; the ER model becomes an abstract data model, that defines a data or information structure which can be implemented in a database a relational database. Entity–relationship modeling was developed for database design by Peter Chen and published in a 1976 paper. However, variants of the idea existed previously; some ER models show super and subtype entities connected by generalization-specialization relationships, an ER model can be used in the specification of domain-specific ontologies. An entity–relationship model is the result of systematic analysis to define and describe what is important to processes in an area of a business, it does not define the business processes.
It is drawn in a graphical form as boxes that are connected by lines which express the associations and dependencies between entities. An ER model can be expressed in a verbal form, for example: one building may be divided into zero or more apartments, but one apartment can only be located in one building. Entities may be characterized not only by relationships, but by additional properties, which include identifiers called "primary keys". Diagrams created to represent attributes as well as entities and relationships may be called entity-attribute-relationship diagrams, rather than entity–relationship models. An ER model is implemented as a database. In a simple relational database implementation, each row of a table represents one instance of an entity type, each field in a table represents an attribute type. In a relational database a relationship between entities is implemented by storing the primary key of one entity as a pointer or "foreign key" in the table of another entity There is a tradition for ER/data models to be built at two or three levels of abstraction.
Note that the conceptual-logical-physical hierarchy below is used in other kinds of specification, is different from the three schema approach to software engineering. Conceptual data model This is the highest level ER model in that it contains the least granular detail but establishes the overall scope of what is to be included within the model set; the conceptual ER model defines master reference data entities that are used by the organization. Developing an enterprise-wide conceptual ER model is useful to support documenting the data architecture for an organization. A conceptual ER model may be used as more logical data models; the purpose of the conceptual ER model is to establish structural metadata commonality for the master data entities between the set of logical ER models. The conceptual data model may be used to form commonality relationships between ER models as a basis for data model integration. Logical data model A logical ER model does not require a conceptual ER model if the scope of the logical ER model includes only the development of a distinct information system.
The logical ER model contains more detail than the conceptual ER model. In addition to master data entities and transactional data entities are now defined; the details of each data entity are developed and the relationships between these data entities are established. The logical ER model is however developed independently of the specific database management system into which it can be implemented. Physical data model One or more physical ER; the physical ER model is developed to be instantiated as a database. Therefore, each physical ER model must contain enough detail to produce a database and each physical ER model is technology dependent since each database management system is somewhat different; the physical model is instantiated in the structural metadata of a database management system as relational database objects such as database tables, database indexes such as unique key indexes, database constraints such as a foreign key constraint or a commonality constraint. The ER model is normally used to design modifications to the relational database objects and to maintain the structural metadata of the database.
The first stage of information system design uses these models during the requirements analysis to describe information needs or the type of information, to be stored in a database. The data modeling technique can be used to describe any ontology for a certain area of interest. In the case of the design of an information system, based on a database, the conceptual data model is, at a stage, mapped to a logical data model, such as the relational model. Note that sometimes, both of these phases are referred to as "physical design." An entity may be defined as a thing capable of an independent existence that can be uniquely identified. An entity is an abstraction from the complexities of a domain; when we speak of an entity, we speak of some aspect of the real world that can be distinguished from other aspects of the real world. An entity is a thing that exists either logically. An entity may be a physical object such as a house or a car, an event
BIBFRAME is a data model for bibliographic description. BIBFRAME was designed to replace the MARC standards, to use linked data principles to make bibliographic data more useful both within and outside the library community; the MARC Standards, which BIBFRAME seeks to replace, were developed by Henriette Avram at the US Library of Congress during the 1960s. By 1971, MARC formats had become the national standard for dissemination of bibliographic data in the United States, the international standard by 1973. In a provocatively titled 2002 article, library technologist Roy Tennant argued that "MARC Must Die", noting that the standard was old. A 2008 report from the Library of Congress wrote that MARC is "based on forty-year old techniques for data management and is out of step with programming styles of today."In 2012, the Library of Congress announced that it had contracted with Zepheira, a data management company, to develop a linked data alternative to MARC. That year, the library announced a new model called MARC Resources.
That November, the library released a more complete draft of the model, renamed BIBFRAME. The Library of Congress released version 2.0 of BIBFRAME in 2016. BIBFRAME is expressed in RDF and based on three categories of abstraction, with three additional classes that relate to the core categories. While the work entity in BIBFRAME may be "considered as the union of the disjoint work and expression entities" in IFLA's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records entity relationship model, BIBFRAME's instance entity is analogous to the FRBR manifestation entity; this represents an apparent break with FRBR and the FRBR-based Resource Description and Access cataloging code. However, the original BIBFRAME model argues that the new model "can reflect the FRBR relationships in terms of a graph rather than as hierarchical relationships, after applying a reductionist technique." Since both FRBR and BIBFRAME have been expressed in RDF, interoperability between the two models is technically possible.
While the BIBFRAME model includes a serial entity, there are still a number of issues to be addressed before the model can be used for serials cataloging. BIBFRAME lacks several serials-related data fields available in MARC. A 2014 report was positive on BIBFRAME's suitability for describing audio and video resources. However, the report expressed some concern about the high-level Work entity, unsuitable for modeling certain audio resources. Colorado College's Tutt Library has created several experimental apps using BIBFRAME. 14 other research libraries are testing the model. ExLibris published a roadmap to implement BIBFRAME in its library systems, which includes a MARC-to-BIBFRAME transformation. RDA, FRBR, FRBRoo, FRAD, FRSAD are available in RDF in the Open Metadata Registry, a metadata registry. Schema Bib Extend project, a W3C-sponsored community group has worked to extend Schema.org to make it suitable for bibliographic description. Europeana Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Functional Requirements for Authority Data Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data International Standard Bibliographic Description Linked data Open Library Resource Description and Access Schema.org Official Website Current BIBFRAME vocabularies