It is designed as a container for citations. Articles are one such
example, but that well-understood format is not BIBO's main focus.
They've been going after the tough ones, including legal cases,
conference presentations, letters, etc. Oh, yeah, books, book
chapters, quotations. For a partial list, see
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> My problem with bibo is that it's strongly oriented toward academic journal
> articles... I would like to see a comparison to MARC, if anyone has done
> that, which might give us an idea of what isn't there. For example, I don't
> see the various work/work, work/expression relationships. But it has great
> detail in some areas, like time intervals and access rights.
> Tom Keays wrote:
>> The linked open data crowd might suggest:
>> Bibliographic Ontology Specification (aka bibo)
>> Abstract: The Bibliographic Ontology Specification provides main
>> concepts and properties for describing citations and bibliographic
>> references (i.e. quotes, books, articles, etc) on the Semantic Web.
>> A lot of work has gone into this to make it work with a wide variety
>> of possible use cases. It acknowledges FRBR, but doesn't require it.
>> The Swedish national library uses a tiny fraction of BIBO, along with
>> DC and other RDF vocabularies. BIBO as a whole is much more granular
>> than MARC, but whether that makes it more or less suited as a library
>> format probably depends on who you are.
>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Peter Schlumpf <[log in to unmask]>
>>> I have been lurking on (or ignoring) this forum for years. And libraries
>>> too. Some of you may know me. I am the Avanti guy. I am, perhaps, the
>>> first person to try to produce an open source ILS back in 1999, though there
>>> is a David Duncan out there who tried before I did. I was there when all
>>> this stuff was coming together.
>>> Since then I have seen a lot of good things happen. There's Koha.
>>> There's Evergreen. They are good things. I have also seen first hand how
>>> libraries get screwed over and over by commercial vendors with their crappy
>>> software. I believe free software is the answer to that. I have neglected
>>> Avanti for years, but now I am ready to return to it.
>>> I want to get back to simple things. Imagine if there were no Marc
>>> records. Minimal layers of abstraction. No politics. No vendors. No SQL
>>> straightjacket. What would an ILS look like without those things?
>>> Sometimes the biggest prison is between the ears.
>>> I am in a position to do this now, and that's what I have decided to do.
>>> I am getting busy.
>>> Peter Schlumpf
> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
> [log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
> ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
> fx.: 510-848-3913
> mo.: 510-435-8234