Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng por |
Título da fonte: | Encontros Bibli |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822 |
Resumo: | Objective: To propose the harmonization between the EDM, BIBFRAME, and IFLA LRM models with the purpose of analyzing the equivalence of entities to enable the interoperability between systems that use these conceptual models as a basis. Method: This research is characterized as exploratory and descriptive with a qualitative approach, in which a bibliographic survey was used to identify the studies already carried out on the topic. In addition, the analysis of entities was based on the methodology substantiated by Pierre et al. (1999), Taniguchi (2018), Arakaki (2019), and Carrasco (2019). Results: From the analysis of the models, six ontological categories of entities were identified: (i) Intellectual Content, (ii) Subject, (iii) Concrete Unit, (iv) Agent, (v) Space-time, and (vi) Reification. Consistent equivalences were observed between the entities, their functionalities, and terminology in most categories, except for the entities of the Intellectual Content category and the structuring of the Concrete Unit category. Conclusions: It was concluded that the most notable difference between the models was expressed in the Intellectual Content category, and that, because they are based on the cataloging tradition, the IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME models have functionally equivalent entities, while the EDM model, focused on the cultural heritage object itself, does not have any entity that may be mapped in this category. Likewise, a structural difference was found in the Concrete Unit category, in which the EDM model makes a distinction between the object itself and its digital representation, whereas such a distinction occurs in the Intellectual Content category for the IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME models. |
id |
UFSC-29_b88c03bd23c063a7258e3a6a6e5cd164 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/92822 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSC-29 |
network_name_str |
Encontros Bibli |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual modelsAnálisis y correspondencia entre las entidades de los modelos conceptuales Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM y BIBFRAMEAnálise e correspondência entre as entidades dos modelos conceituais Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM e BIBFRAMEEuropeana Data ModelBIBFRAMEIFLA LRMCataloguingMetadataEuropeana Data ModelBIBFRAMEIFLA LRMCatalogaçãoMetadadosEuropeana Data ModelBIBFRAMEIFLA LRMCatalogaciónMetadatosObjective: To propose the harmonization between the EDM, BIBFRAME, and IFLA LRM models with the purpose of analyzing the equivalence of entities to enable the interoperability between systems that use these conceptual models as a basis. Method: This research is characterized as exploratory and descriptive with a qualitative approach, in which a bibliographic survey was used to identify the studies already carried out on the topic. In addition, the analysis of entities was based on the methodology substantiated by Pierre et al. (1999), Taniguchi (2018), Arakaki (2019), and Carrasco (2019). Results: From the analysis of the models, six ontological categories of entities were identified: (i) Intellectual Content, (ii) Subject, (iii) Concrete Unit, (iv) Agent, (v) Space-time, and (vi) Reification. Consistent equivalences were observed between the entities, their functionalities, and terminology in most categories, except for the entities of the Intellectual Content category and the structuring of the Concrete Unit category. Conclusions: It was concluded that the most notable difference between the models was expressed in the Intellectual Content category, and that, because they are based on the cataloging tradition, the IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME models have functionally equivalent entities, while the EDM model, focused on the cultural heritage object itself, does not have any entity that may be mapped in this category. Likewise, a structural difference was found in the Concrete Unit category, in which the EDM model makes a distinction between the object itself and its digital representation, whereas such a distinction occurs in the Intellectual Content category for the IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME models.Objetivo: proponer la armonización entre los modelos EDM, BIBFRAME e IFLA LRM, con el fin de analizar la equivalencia de entidades para permitir la interoperabilidad entre sistemas que utilizan como base estos modelos conceptuales. Método: esta investigación se caracteriza por ser de naturaleza exploratoria y descriptiva con enfoque cualitativo, en la que se utiliza un levantamiento bibliográfico para identificar estudios ya realizados sobre el tema. Además, para el análisis de entidades se basa en la metodología basada en Pierre et al. (1999), Taniguchi (2018), Arakaki (2019) y Verdugo (2019). Resultados: a partir del análisis de los modelos, se identificaron seis categorías ontológicas de entidades: (i) Contenido Intelectual; (ii) Sujeto; (iii) Unidad de Concreto; (iv) Agente; (v) Espacio-tiempo, y (vi) Cosificación. Se observaron equivalencias consistentes entre entidades, sus funcionalidades y terminología en la mayoría de las categorías, con excepción de las entidades en la categoría Contenido Intelectual y la estructuración de la categoría Unidad Concreta. Conclusiones: se concluye que la diferencia más notable entre los modelos se expresa en la categoría de Contenido Intelectual, y que el IFLA LRM y el BIBFRAME, por ser modelos basados ??en la tradición de catalogación, tienen entidades funcionalmente equivalentes, mientras que el EDM, como modelo dirigido al objeto de patrimonio cultural en sí mismo, no tiene ninguna entidad que pueda mapearse en esta categoría. Además, se encontró que existe una diferencia estructural en la categoría Unidad Concreta, donde el EDM hace una distinción entre el objeto en sí y su representación digital, mientras que en los modelos IFLA LRM y BIBFRAME, tal distinción se da en la categoría de Contenido Intelectual.Objetivo: objetiva-se propor a harmonização entre os modelos EDM, BIBFRAME e IFLA LRM, com o propósito de analisar a equivalência de entidades para possibilitar a interoperabilidade entre sistemas que utilizam como base esses modelos conceituais. Método: esta pesquisa se caracteriza como de natureza exploratória e descritiva com abordagem qualitativa, na qual utiliza-se do levantamento bibliográfico para a identificação dos estudos já realizados a respeito da temática. Além disso, para a análise de entidades, pauta-se na metodologia fundamentada por Pierre et al. (1999), Taniguchi (2018), Arakaki (2019) e Carrasco (2019). Resultados: a partir da análise dos modelos, foram identificadas seis categorias ontológicas de entidades: (i) Conteúdo Intelectual; (ii) Assunto; (iii) Unidade Concreta; (iv) Agente; (v) Espaço-tempo, e (vi) Reificação. Observou-se equivalências consistentes entre as entidades, suas funcionalidades e terminologia na maior parte das categorias, tendo como exceção as entidades da categoria Conteúdo Intelectual e a estruturação da categoria Unidade Concreta. Conclusões: conclui-se que a diferença mais notável entre os modelos se expressa na categoria Conteúdo Intelectual, e que o IFLA LRM e o BIBFRAME por serem modelos fundamentados na tradição catalográfica têm entidades funcionalmente equivalentes, ao passo que o EDM, como modelo voltado ao objeto de patrimônio cultural em si, não possui nenhuma entidade que possa ser mapeada nessa categoria, Outrossim,constatou-se há uma diferença estrutural na categoria Unidade Concreta, onde o EDM faz uma distinção entre o objeto em si e sua representação digital, ao passo que nos modelos IFLA LRM e BIBFRAME, tal distinção ocorre na categoria Conteúdo Intelectual.Departamento de Ciência da Informação – UFSC2023-06-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/9282210.5007/1518-2924.2023.e92822Encontros Bibli: revista eletrônica de biblioteconomia e ciência da informação; Vol. 28 (2023): Innovation, Technology and Sustainability; 1-22Encontros Bibli: revista electrónica de bibliotecología y ciencias de la información.; Vol. 28 (2023): Innovación, Tecnología y Sustentabilidad; 1-22Encontros Bibli: revista eletrônica de biblioteconomia e ciência da informação; v. 28 (2023): Inovação, Tecnologia e Sustentabilidade; 1-221518-2924reponame:Encontros Bibliinstname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCengporhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/54068https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/53425https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/53418https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/53419Copyright (c) 2023 Rhuan Henrique Alves de Oliveira, Luana Carolina de Castro Gil, Ana Carolina Simionato Arakaki, Fabiano Ferreira de Castrohttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessOliveira, Rhuan Henrique Alves deGil, Luana Carolina de CastroArakaki, Ana Carolina SimionatoCastro, Fabiano Ferreira de2023-11-15T12:31:13Zoai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/92822Revistahttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/indexPUBhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/oaiencontrosbibli@contato.ufsc.br||portaldeperiodicos.bu@contato.ufsc.br1518-29241518-2924opendoar:2023-11-15T12:31:13Encontros Bibli - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models Análisis y correspondencia entre las entidades de los modelos conceptuales Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM y BIBFRAME Análise e correspondência entre as entidades dos modelos conceituais Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM e BIBFRAME |
title |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models |
spellingShingle |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models Oliveira, Rhuan Henrique Alves de Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Cataloguing Metadata Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Catalogação Metadados Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Catalogación Metadatos |
title_short |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models |
title_full |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models |
title_fullStr |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models |
title_full_unstemmed |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models |
title_sort |
Analysis and correspondence between the entities of Europeana Data Model, IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME conceptual models |
author |
Oliveira, Rhuan Henrique Alves de |
author_facet |
Oliveira, Rhuan Henrique Alves de Gil, Luana Carolina de Castro Arakaki, Ana Carolina Simionato Castro, Fabiano Ferreira de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Gil, Luana Carolina de Castro Arakaki, Ana Carolina Simionato Castro, Fabiano Ferreira de |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Oliveira, Rhuan Henrique Alves de Gil, Luana Carolina de Castro Arakaki, Ana Carolina Simionato Castro, Fabiano Ferreira de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Cataloguing Metadata Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Catalogação Metadados Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Catalogación Metadatos |
topic |
Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Cataloguing Metadata Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Catalogação Metadados Europeana Data Model BIBFRAME IFLA LRM Catalogación Metadatos |
description |
Objective: To propose the harmonization between the EDM, BIBFRAME, and IFLA LRM models with the purpose of analyzing the equivalence of entities to enable the interoperability between systems that use these conceptual models as a basis. Method: This research is characterized as exploratory and descriptive with a qualitative approach, in which a bibliographic survey was used to identify the studies already carried out on the topic. In addition, the analysis of entities was based on the methodology substantiated by Pierre et al. (1999), Taniguchi (2018), Arakaki (2019), and Carrasco (2019). Results: From the analysis of the models, six ontological categories of entities were identified: (i) Intellectual Content, (ii) Subject, (iii) Concrete Unit, (iv) Agent, (v) Space-time, and (vi) Reification. Consistent equivalences were observed between the entities, their functionalities, and terminology in most categories, except for the entities of the Intellectual Content category and the structuring of the Concrete Unit category. Conclusions: It was concluded that the most notable difference between the models was expressed in the Intellectual Content category, and that, because they are based on the cataloging tradition, the IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME models have functionally equivalent entities, while the EDM model, focused on the cultural heritage object itself, does not have any entity that may be mapped in this category. Likewise, a structural difference was found in the Concrete Unit category, in which the EDM model makes a distinction between the object itself and its digital representation, whereas such a distinction occurs in the Intellectual Content category for the IFLA LRM and BIBFRAME models. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-06-21 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822 10.5007/1518-2924.2023.e92822 |
url |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5007/1518-2924.2023.e92822 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng por |
language |
eng por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/54068 https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/53425 https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/53418 https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/eb/article/view/92822/53419 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Departamento de Ciência da Informação – UFSC |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Departamento de Ciência da Informação – UFSC |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Encontros Bibli: revista eletrônica de biblioteconomia e ciência da informação; Vol. 28 (2023): Innovation, Technology and Sustainability; 1-22 Encontros Bibli: revista electrónica de bibliotecología y ciencias de la información.; Vol. 28 (2023): Innovación, Tecnología y Sustentabilidad; 1-22 Encontros Bibli: revista eletrônica de biblioteconomia e ciência da informação; v. 28 (2023): Inovação, Tecnologia e Sustentabilidade; 1-22 1518-2924 reponame:Encontros Bibli instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) instacron:UFSC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
instacron_str |
UFSC |
institution |
UFSC |
reponame_str |
Encontros Bibli |
collection |
Encontros Bibli |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Encontros Bibli - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
encontrosbibli@contato.ufsc.br||portaldeperiodicos.bu@contato.ufsc.br |
_version_ |
1797067779792175104 |