[openbiblio-dev] Feedback on my BibJSON record
johnson.tom at gmail.com
Sat Feb 23 08:10:58 UTC 2013
If you are starting from BibJSON, JSON-LD "support" is as simple as
creating a context document mapping tokens to the desired URIs. What the
context document looks like depends mostly on which vocabularies/terms you
want in your graph. I'm guessing this is the reason it was decided not to
include an example in the documentation.
I did some work on JSON-LD and BibJSON, published in the most recent
Code4Lib Journal. http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/7949
Is there is interest in an example context document and some guidance
Sylvian: do you have a use case for the linked data?
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Sylvain Hellegouarch <
sylvain.hellegouarch at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2013/2/22 Karen Coyle <kcoyle at kcoyle.net>
>> It would really be great to have a list of BibJSON terms, and a clear
>> statement about the BibJSON format. If they exist, I can't find them. There
>> was a discussion about using JSON-LD, but the last thing I can find is a
>> blog post saying it is being considered . Looking now the bibJSON.org
>> page says:
>> "JSON-LD example
>> We would like to use real world examples as far as possible - do you
>> require linked data functionality within BibJSON? If so, please contact us
>> and we can work through a BibJSON / JSON-LD example with you."
>> And just below it is:
>> "There is no fixed schema as yet, but as JSON-LD is supported it is
>> possible to reference any vocabulary via a namespace declaration and use it
>> with your key/value pairs where necessary."
>> So I would like to make a call for some clarity in the documentation, and
>> for documentation beyond the one page of examples. I hadn't seen that
>> JSON-LD had been accepted, and I have to surmise it from "but as JSON-LD is
>> supported...." which isn't ideal as documentation. I believe that there are
>> terms that are considered accepted terms for bibjson -- a list of them
>> should be made available, preferably in a machine-actionable form as well
>> as human-readable.
>> That said, if one needs to cover the library distinctions of title,
>> subtitle, and statement of responsibility, it would probably be best not to
>> use dc:title at all but to take these from a library vocabulary (e.g.
>> rdvocab). However, my preference is to drop the statement of responsibility
>> (which doesn't make sense displayed anywhere but as a continuation of
>> title, which only library software knows to do) and put title and subtitle
>> into dc:title.
>> DC still doesn't have a clear "date of publication" but other
>> vocabularies do. I have no idea if there is one in bibJSON.
>>  http://openbiblio.net/2012/02/**21/json-ld-bibjson/<http://openbiblio.net/2012/02/21/json-ld-bibjson/>
> I'll admit the bibjson page is a bit lacking when it comes to describing
> what is the minimum required to describe a record and, moreoever, it
> mentions JSON-LD but without explaining how this should be used. In the
> ened, I purposefully avoided JSON-LD as I had no idea how to use it in this
> In regards to DC, it is important to note that I'm trying to follow rules
>  provided by the BnF  which likely apply in France only. Whether I
> should follow those rules in order to play nicely with international
> datasets is open to debate.
> This present thread was merely to determine if I was going completely off
> http://www.bnf.fr/fr/professionnels/formats_catalogage/a.f_dublin_core.html (French)
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BnF
> - Sylvain
> openbiblio-dev mailing list
> openbiblio-dev at lists.okfn.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/openbiblio-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openbiblio-dev