# Library Standards and URIs

weibel@oclc.org
Tue, 13 Dec 1994 07:50:24 -0500

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Eliot Christian: "OIW/SIG-LA meeting on Jan 11"
- Previous message: Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu: "SOAPs as URCs [was: HTTP Futures]"
- Next in thread: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Jim Conklin: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Terry Winograd: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"

    From: weibel@oclc.org

    Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 07:50:24 -0500

    Message-Id: <199412131250.HAA08791@ws02-00.rsch.oclc.org>

    To: uri@bunyip.com

    Subject: Library Standards and URIs

Larry suggested I go ahead and post these notes to the list. Its just an outline,
and hence may be less than entirely scrutable to those not in attendence (perhaps
those who were, as well ;-). I'd be happy to take up the discussion with any who
have comments or questions.

stu

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IETF December, 1994
San Jose, California
URI Working Group
Existing Library Standards and the Evolution of
Uniform Resource Characteristics
Stuart Weibel
Senior Research Scientist
Office of Research
OCLC Online Computer Library Center
weibel@oclc.org
I. Objective of the Library Community:
Integrate electronic resource discovery with existing
paper resource discovery and retrieval.
(don't break what works)
II. Basic Assumptions about URCs and their relationship to existing
library standards:
The Virtual library and the RL library must interoperate if the
needs of users are to be met.
Different object types have different requirements; not everything
should be described in the same ways or with the same level of detail.
URCs will have type attributes and perhaps level attributes.
URC types should share a common kernel of data elements.
URCs will be mapped algorithmically into and out of MARC records;
to the extent they are designed with this in mind, the Net and
existing libraries will work better together. MARC need not be
the syntactical wrapper for URCs, but the rules for encoding
MARC records (Anglo-American Cataloging Rules, or AACR-2) should
inform those elements of the URC that are similar.
Creation of URCs will take place over a wide spectrum of sources and
methods, with varying degrees of richness and quality:
- professional catalogers
- publishers
- authors
- content experts
- automatic cataloging
The richness and quality of records will thus vary across a broad
range; it will be necessary to develop procedures and means to
promote records from one level to a higher level, by addition of
more information, or application of authority control, for example.
III. Authority Control:
Authority control will loom ever larger as an essential feature of
networked information management as the quanity of information
on the networks increases.
Authority control helps brings some things together and separate
others. For example, many versions of a single intellectual work
can be grouped as a single work by the application of a Uniform Title.
Name authority records can be used to distinguish among many objects
having apparently similar author fields, but different actual authors.
There are exisiting procedures (and data files) for addressing these
issues now extant in the world of bibliographic description that can
be applied to networked information as this becomes necessary,
including:
Personal Names
Corporate Names
Geographic Names
Uniform Titles
Series
Subjects (controlled vocabularies)
IV. Versioning
A very hard problem: countervailing priorities generally obtain.
A gerneral reader may just want any copy of Hamlet; multiple versions
in a catalog are confusing. A scholar may be very interested in the
history of editions of Hamlet; for her, the same information that was
an annoyance to the general user is essential to her purpose.
Examples of two strategies for control numbers that have implications
for versioning:
ISBN
- Assigned by publishers (distributed naming authotrity
- Essentially an inventory control identifier
- the same intellectual work is often assigned many ISBNs;
successive editions, different formats, etc.
ISSN
- Assigned by a central authority
- Oriented more towards identification of
intellectual content than an artifact.
V. Possible Candidates for URC Kernels
Text Encoding Initiative Headers:
Part of a ten year project to define the structure (in SGML) of
scholarly text. Considerable attention has been paid to mapping
into and out of existing bibliographic data models.
Core Bibliographic Record:
A new standard of bibliographic description, positioned between
full cataloging minimal level cataloging standards. The goal is
to reduce the costs of cataloging without substantiallty
compromising the usefulsness of the resulting records. May provide
some insights as to a target level of description for electronic
resources.
VI. Further Reading:
The following articles afford an introduction to TEI headers and their
application, as well as some background on the evolution of cataloging
standards in libraries.
The Documentation of Electronic Texts Using Text Encoding Initiative
Headers: An Introduction
Richard Giordano
Library Resources and Technical Services
38(4) 389-401 1994
Discusses the benefits and possible faults of the TEI header as a
basis for electronic text cataloging. A basic introduction to TEI
headers
Cataloging Electronic Texts: The University of Virginia Library
Experience
Edward Gaynor
Library Resources and Technical Services
38(4) 403-413
Describes one of the first efforts to integrate electronic document
cataloging in a conventional library environment; discusses aspects
of mapping between TEI headers and MARC records.
The Core Record: A New Bibliographic Standard
Willy Cromwell
Library Resources and Technical Services
38(4) 415-424 1994
A background paper on the development of a new cataloging level
intended to reduce the costs of cataloging; less extensive than
conventional full-level cataloging, more detailed than minimal-level
cataloging.

- Next message: Eliot Christian: "OIW/SIG-LA meeting on Jan 11"
- Previous message: Jared_Rhine@hmc.edu: "SOAPs as URCs [was: HTTP Futures]"
- Next in thread: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Jim Conklin: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Terry Winograd: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"
- Maybe reply: Dirk Herr-Hoyman: "Re: Library Standards and URIs"