New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Collecting feedback on LoC dataset #33

Closed
acka47 opened this Issue Nov 13, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@acka47
Copy link
Contributor

acka47 commented Nov 13, 2018

In this issue we collect things (errors, bugs, things that might be improved) we noticed in the LoC's Bibframe dataset.

  • contribution array is not an ordered list
  • Some properties are used where the URIs don't resolve, see #32 (comment)
  • It would be nice if LoC provided a JSON-LD context for the dataset
@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

acka47 commented Nov 14, 2018

There are redundancies between classes in the MADS and Bibframe vocabularies which both are used:

  • bf:GenreForm and mads:GenreForm
  • bf:Temporal and mads:Temporal
  • bf:Topic and mads:Topic
@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

acka47 commented Nov 16, 2018

The wrong URI is used for mads:isMemberOfMADSScheme, it should be http://www.loc.gov/mads/rdf/v1#isMemberOfMADSScheme but is http://www.loc.gov/mads/rdf/v1#isMemberofMADSScheme (with lower case "o")

@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

acka47 commented Nov 19, 2018

Instead of the correct http://id.loc.gov/ontologies/bibframe/instrumentalType the following is used: http://id.loc.gov/ontologies/bibframe/instrumentType

@acka47 acka47 added working ready and removed working labels Dec 14, 2018

@acka47 acka47 self-assigned this Dec 14, 2018

@kirkhess

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

kirkhess commented Jan 31, 2019

Thank you for the comments - I wanted to reply about the context question. The BIBFRAME editor uses this context:
"@context": {
"rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
"rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
"xsd": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#",
"bf": "http://id.loc.gov/ontologies/bibframe/",
"bflc": "http://id.loc.gov/ontologies/bflc/",
"madsrdf": "http://www.loc.gov/mads/rdf/v1#",
"pmo": "http://performedmusicontology.org/ontology/"
},

We can publish this context but I think you were suggesting a specific way to do it? We put our documentation on http://www.loc.gov/bibframe so by default we'd probably put it there unless you have another suggestion.

For your issues, we are tracking issues here:
https://github.com/lcnetdev/bibframe-ontology/issues

Thanks!
Kirk Hess
LC

@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

acka47 commented Jan 31, 2019

Thanks for the response, Kirk. You are right that we are thinking about a more elaborate context. The one you provide is basically declaring namespace prefixes so that JSON keys won't be URIs but e.g. "bf:contribution". But the JSON-LD context can provide much more to make the actual JSON-LD data better to read and to work with. I provide some examples in the blog post:

For example with the line "label": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label" in the context, I can now use the key "label" in a JSON-LD document and when including the context in the document (for example by referencing it like "@context": "https://example.org/context.jsonld") the key-value pair can be translated to an RDF triple. The context is also used to declare that the values of a specific key should be interpreted as URIs (by saying "@type": "@id") or as a date (example) or to enforce that a key always is used with an array ("@container": "@set"), see e.g here.

See the context we created to get a picture of what we have in mind: https://github.com/hbz/swib18-workshop/blob/master/data/context.json Though we already have a context to use in our project and do not have the need for it right now, it would be great in my opinion if LoC would provided kind of a "canonical" context for the dataset for others to use.

@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

acka47 commented Jan 31, 2019

@kirkhess I opened two issues in the Bibframe ontology repo. As the other issues refer to the Bibframe works dataset published in May/June 2018, I guess https://github.com/lcnetdev/bibframe-ontology/issues is not the right place to address those, is it?

@acka47

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

acka47 commented Feb 7, 2019

Closing as the feedback was submitted to LoC.

@acka47 acka47 closed this Feb 7, 2019

@acka47 acka47 removed the ready label Feb 7, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment