[XML4Lib] mods: the new marc?

[Rebecca S. Guenther]

I might mention that we are working on an RDF/OWL version of MODS using
the Simile work as a starting point. We aren't yet ready to put something
out, but can let this list know when we do.

Rebecca
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^  Rebecca S. Guenther                                   ^^
^^  Senior Networking and Standards Specialist            ^^
^^  Network Development and MARC Standards Office         ^^
^^  1st and Independence Ave. SE                          ^^
^^  Library of Congress                                   ^^
^^  Washington, DC 20540-4402                             ^^
^^  (202) 707-5092 (voice)    (202) 707-0115 (FAX)        ^^
^^  rgue at loc.gov                                          ^^
^^                                                        ^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Kyle Fenton wrote:

> Hi Eric,
> 
> If you choose MODS you'd have as company the Digital Library  
> Federation, who have developed a MODS profile for its Aquifer project:
> 
> http://wiki.dlib.indiana.edu/confluence/display/DLFAquifer/DLF+Aquifer+Public+Metadata+Documents
> 
>   If you want to store extended information that MODS does not cover,  
> you might consider wrapping MODS inside one or another of the METS  
> profiles already available.
> 
> --
> Kyle Fenton
> Emory University Libraries
> 
> P.S.  -- you may be interested in the current email threads on NGC4LIB  
> regarding next generation cataloging issues (esp. FRBR)
> 
> 
> On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:34 PM, Eric Lease Morgan wrote:
> 
> >
> > Is MODS the new MARC?
> >
> > As you may or may not know, I advocate "catalogs" include content  
> > beyond the things a library owns or licenses. Moreover, I advocate  
> > libraries take a more active role in collecting and providing  
> > services against information resources no matter where they reside  
> > on a network. Don't get me wrong, I don't advocating "cataloging"  
> > the entire Internet, but I do advocate actively collecting materials  
> > apropos to the needs of a particular library's patrons.
> >
> > In an effort to demonstrate such an idea I would like to collect and  
> > provide services against a number of different types of data/ 
> > information freely available on the 'Net. Some of these things  
> > include but are not to the following listed in no priority order:  
> > electronic books/texts (Project Gutenberg, University of Michigan  
> > MBooks, Open Content Alliance, etc.), electronic journals from DOAJ,  
> > electronic journal articles from DOAJ Articles, pre-prints and post- 
> > prints from various OAI repositories, mailing list messages,  
> > selected blog postings, theses & dissertations from NDLTD, etc.
> >
> > Each of the things above can be systematically harvested through the  
> > use of OAI, simple Web crawling, or the retrieval of data sets. Once  
> > harvested the data could be stored in a database and/or indexed  
> > providing the means for discovery and services. The storage of this  
> > content in a database begs questions regarding tables, records, and  
> > fields. What might they be? Similarly, unless the index is going to  
> > be 100% free text, the harvest content/metadata will need to mapped  
> > to fields. Again, what fields?
> >
> > I'm not so naive to believe there is such a thing a the perfect  
> > database structure for this "catalog", nor do I believe free text  
> > indexing is the answer either. So, what sort of data structure  
> > should I use? Not MARC. MODS? Some incarnation of RDF?
> >
> > If I go this route I see the following plan:
> >
> >  0. Articulate a collection policy.
> >  1. Acquire/harvest content in its raw form.
> >  2. Convert the raw content into MODS, RDF, or
> >     something else.
> >  3. Save/archive the raw data because things get lost
> >     in translation.
> >  4. Save the MODS or RDF to a (XML) database.
> >  5. Parse the MODS or RDF and save it to a
> >     (relational) database.
> >  6. Run scripts against the database to create things
> >     like browsable lists, create new relationships
> >     between items, or simply enhanced.
> >  7. Index the MODS or RDF, or write a report against
> >     the database intended for indexing.
> >  8. Provide access to the index (via SRU, OpenSearch,
> >     or Z39.50).
> >  9. Provide services against the search results such
> >     as Get It, Review It, Buy It, Bookmark It, Compare It
> >     To Other things, etc.
> > 10. Got to Step #1.
> >
> > Assuming there is no single database structure for such a idea, what  
> > flavor of XML would you use as your canonical data format? MODS?  
> > RDF? Something else?
> >
> > -- 
> > Eric Lease Morgan
> > University Libraries of Notre Dame
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > XML4Lib mailing list
> > XML4Lib at webjunction.org
> > http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/xml4lib
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> XML4Lib mailing list
> XML4Lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/xml4lib
>