[Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten] AW: scope of holdings information

[Owen Stephens]

In the museum space CIDOC CRM seems to have some traction which has a number of relevant properties in the range P49-P55 - e.g.:

P50 - has current keeper
P52 - has current owner
P55 - has current location

I guess one major question is what the scope of 'holdings' is. Are we trying to represent solely the ownership of things by a library (or other organisation/person) or some other aspects (such as their current location which could include 'on loan to person X')

Owen

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com
Email: owen at ostephens.com
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 17 Apr 2013, at 09:13, "Klee, Carsten" <Carsten.Klee at sbb.spk-berlin.de> wrote:

> Hi Evelyn,
> 
> you're right. I don't have any further insight in other domain knowledge and holdings descriptions. Maybe our approach should not be to fulfil everyone's wishes.
> But I think a Holding-Ontology should be 'open' enough, so that parts can be reused in other domains. That is why I mentioned DAIA. I found this a good example for an ontology to be reused in other domains. E.g. in DAIA 0.5 [1] it is not daia:callnumber but daia:label. In other parts DAIA 0.5 is a little more in the library corner, like daia:exemplar (archives and museums might have only unique items).
> Maybe that's all too idealistic and archives and museums need a total different holdings description, like you said. What we have to deal with is a triangle of document, institution and item/holding, while archives and museums might only have the relation between institution and item. Please correct me, if I'm totally wrong.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Carsten
> 
> 
> [1] <http://uri.gbv.de/ontology/daia/>
> _______________________________________________
> Carsten Klee
> Abt. Überregionale Bibliographische Dienste IIE
> Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin - Preußischer Kulturbesitz
> 
> Fon:  +49 30 266-43 44 02
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten-bounces at lists.d-nb.de [mailto:dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten-bounces at lists.d-nb.de] Im Auftrag von Rauchegger Evelyn
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. April 2013 14:05
> An: 'dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten at lists.d-nb.de'
> Betreff: [Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten] AW: scope of holdings information
> 
> Dear Carsten, dear list,
> 
> I generally agree that our approach to the holdings ontology should be open and flexible in order
> to integrate other data as well i.e. non-library data.
> However, I would like to know which other data this could be in more detail. Depending on
> the group members' domain knowledge
> we might not be able to fulfill that wish because of a lack of insight into other
> relevant data and concepts. Museum or archive holdings for example might be a completely
> different thing. I cannot tell.
> I suppose success
> in this respect depends on whether there are group members with access to other data. Admittedly
> I don't know much about DAIA yet.
> 
> Best regards,
> Evelyn
> --------
> Evelyn Rauchegger
> Metadatenmanagement 
>  
> ZBW - Deutsche Zentralbibliothek für Wirtschaftswissenschaften
> Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft
> Neuer Jungfernstieg 12
> D-24105 Hamburg
> T: +49 [0]40. 42834 -233
> 
> E.Rauchegger at zbw.eu
> 
> www.zbw.eu
> 
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten-bounces at lists.d-nb.de [mailto:dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten-bounces at lists.d-nb.de] Im Auftrag von Klee, Carsten
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. April 2013 13:21
> An: 'dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten at lists.d-nb.de'
> Betreff: [Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten] scope of holdings information
> 
> Dear list!
> 
> Julia Hauser told me about a question raised in the Titeldaten-Group about our perspective towards the scope of holdings and if we're only going to concentrate on library data.
> 
> As for me our approach should not exclude other data than library holdings data. If we are going to stick to a model similar to DAIA, we'll be on a good side, I think. In my opinion like DAIA "consists of abstract documents, concrete holdings of documents, and document services [...]" a Holdings Ontology should too.
> 
> I'm interested in your opinion about this.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Carsten    
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Carsten Klee
> Abt. Überregionale Bibliographische Dienste IIE Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin - Preußischer Kulturbesitz Potsdamer Straße 33
> 10785 Berlin
> 
> Fon:  +49 30 266-43 44 02
> Fax:   +49 30 266-33 40 01
> carsten.klee at sbb.spk-berlin.de
> www.zeitschriftendatenbank.de
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten mailing list
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten at lists.d-nb.de
> http://lists.d-nb.de/mailman/listinfo/dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten
> _______________________________________________
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten mailing list
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten at lists.d-nb.de
> http://lists.d-nb.de/mailman/listinfo/dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten
> _______________________________________________
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten mailing list
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten at lists.d-nb.de
> http://lists.d-nb.de/mailman/listinfo/dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten