| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

BSC report Oct 2020

Page history last edited by Ann Myers 3 years, 7 months ago


Standard Citation Forms Editorial Team report
Bibliographic Standards Committee
Oct. 6 Meeting

Changes since our last report
Since March, 2020, we have welcomed two new members, Emily Baldoni and Matthew Ducmanas, and bid farewell to one advisory member and three regular members, Ellen Cordes, Jane Carpenter, Brian Stearns, and Martha Lawler. We would like to thank all of them for their contributions to the SCF.

2. Statistics
Since March 15, 2020, the SCF has published 34 [as of 9/18] new citation forms and updated one citation form based on submitted proposals. New and updated citations continue to be announced monthly on DCRM-L.
The site has averaged 1176 sessions and 477 users each month during this period; the number of sessions is down but the number of users is roughly in line with those of the previous period.
3. Linked data recommendations and pilot project
We are at the end of our six-month pilot project, approved at the last BSC meeting (although we are still waiting for that field to display publicly). Of the citation forms the SCF has created in 2020, roughly 30% are not in id.loc.gov. If this is representative of the database as a whole, the Linked Data Working Group’s recommendations do not seem practically feasible at present. It seems unlikely that the SCF will have the bandwidth to create authority records for resources that are not in id.loc.gov, and no other proposals or solutions have been suggested for providing URIs for resources that are not held by LC.
The OCLC linked data project appears to be about two years out. Its current pilot is for digital content. Neither of these seem imminently feasible sources of URIs for the SCF.
4. Questions for the working group and the BSC:
In the absence of proposals for creating URIs for records not in id.loc.gov, would the BSC be open to the SCF adding URIs to records where these exist but continuing to leave that field blank where they do not?

If not, is this important enough to seek the funding/support to migrate to another (presumably more expensive) system that can mint actionable URIs?
In general, what do we want our linked data to do?


Comments (3)

Kate Moriarty said

at 4:08 pm on Sep 23, 2020

Looks great to me!

Alison Greenlee said

at 10:27 am on Sep 24, 2020

Seconded!

JessieSherwood said

at 3:55 pm on Sep 25, 2020

Thanks! I'll send it to the BSC today (Friday, the 25th)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.