BIBFRAME Dilemmas for Libraries: Challenges and Opportunities

I recently attended the 2024 BIBFRAME Workshop in Europe (BFWE), hosted by the National Library of Finland in Helsinki. It was an excellent conference in a great city! Having attended several BFWEs over the years, it’s gratifying to witness the continued progress toward making BIBFRAME the de facto standard for linked data in bibliographic metadata. BIBFRAME was developed and is maintained by the Library of Congress to eventually replace the flat record-based metadata format utilised by the vast majority of libraries – MARC (a standard in use since 1968). This year, Sally McCallum from the Library of Congress shared significant

From MARC to BIBFRAME and Schema.org in a Knowledge Graph

The MARC ingestion pipeline is one of four pipelines that keep the Knowledge Graph, underpinning the LDMS, synchronised with additions, updates, and deletions from the many source systems that NLB curate and host.

Library Metadata Evolution: The Final Mile

When Schema.org arrived on the scene I thought we might have arrived at the point where library metadata  could finally blossom; adding value outside of library systems to help library curated resources become first class citizens, and hence results, in the global web we all inhabit.  But as yet it has not happened.

Bibframe – Schema.org – Chocolate Teapots

In a session at the IFLA WLIC in Kuala Lumpur – my core theme being that there is a need to use two [linked data] vocabularies when describing library resources — Bibframe for cataloguing and [linked] metadata interchange — Schema.org for sharing on the web for discovery.

The Three Linked Data Choices for Libraries

We are [finally] on the cusp of establishing a de facto Linked Data approach for libraries and their system suppliers – not there yet but getting there.

We have a choice between BIBFRAME 2.0, Schema.org, Linky MARC and doing nothing.