From the introduction:
The new, proposed model is simply called BIBFRAME, short for Bibliographic Framework. The new model is more than a mere replacement for the library community’s current model/format, MARC. It is the foundation for the future of bibliographic description that happens on, in, and as part of the web and the networked world we live in. It is designed to integrate with and engage in the wider information community while also serving the very specific needs of its maintenance community – libraries and similar memory organizations. It will realize these objectives in several ways:
- Differentiate clearly between conceptual content and its physical manifestation(s) (e.g., works and instances)
- Focus on unambiguously identifying information entities (e.g., authorities)
- Leverage and expose relationships between and among entities
In a web-scale world, it is imperative to be able to cite library data in a way that not only differentiates the conceptual work (a title and author) from the physical details about that work’s manifestation (page numbers, whether it has illustrations) but also clearly identifies entities involved in the creation of a resource (authors, publishers) and the concepts (subjects) associated with a resource. Standard library description practices, at least until now, have focused on creating catalog records that are independently understandable, by aggregating information about the conceptual work and its physical carrier and by relying heavily on the use of lexical strings for identifiers, such as the name of an author. The proposed BIBFRAME model encourages the creation of clearly identified entities and the use of machine-friendly identifiers which lend themselves to machine interpretation for those entities.
An important draft from the Library of Congress on the BIBFRAME proposal.
Please review and comment. (Plus forward to your library friends.)
I first saw this in a tweet by Ivan Herman.