Spelling it all out: FRAD, ISNI, RDA, VIAF automation and the future of authority control

1. Spelling it all out:FRAD, ISNI, RDA, VIAF automation and the future of authority control Alan Danskin Metadata & Bibliographic Standards Coordinator British Library CILIP HQ, Ridgmount St., London Friday 23rd October, 2009 A. Rose, by any other name: a workshop on authority control

2. Overview • Challenge • Scope • Scalability • Automation • The solution? • Interparty, FRAD, RDA, MARC 21, • EAC, FO:AF; ISNI, VIAF, Names 2 Conclusions

3. Functions of the catalogue • “The catalogue should be an efficient instrument for ascertaining…which works by a particular author are in the library.” Statement of Principles, Paris, 1961 “The catalogue should be an effective and efficient instrument that enables a user …to find sets of resources representing all resources associated with a given person, family, or corporate body” Statement of International Cataloguing Principles, 2009

4. Scope of authority control Which names do we control? • Names of authors and some contributors of published books • Composers of sheet music • Names of corporate bodies responsible for official publications • Names associated with resources catalogued since 1981 • Names associated with audio or audio visual resources, where possible Which names do we exclude? • Names of authors of journal articles or chapters of published books • Contributors whose names fall towards the end of the alphabet or whose contribution we regard as insignificant • Names associated with archival or manuscript material • Names derived from older catalogues • Names associated with most Web Resources • Names in the content management system / institutional repository

5. Publication and research Communicating knowledge: How & why UK researchers publish & disseminate their findings / Research Information Network and JISC. 17 September 2009 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/communicatingknowledgereport.aspx • “The only major exceptions to the dominance of the journal article are the continuing high status attached to monographs and edited volumes in the humanities, and to practice-based outputs in the arts. Yet even in the humanities, journal articles are now by far the largest publication format by volume;” • “In computer science, for example, the pace of change means that conferences are particularly important, and these may attract higher prestige than journal articles…Repositories have achieved less traction in the humanities and social sciences than in many science and engineering subjects. “

6. The problem • There is a gap between ambition and delivery • Only some names on some types of resources are controlled User expectations are changing • Silos: • Libraries / Archives / Repositories / Museums • National practices • Institutional practices • Variance over time Is partial authority control acceptable to users? If not, will it be acceptable to administrators?

7. UK “published” output 2009-09 213404 1525662

8. Workflows • Current workflows are not scalable • Retrospective • Cataloguer driven • Decision making • Is A. Rose PhD the same person as Dr. Alex Rose, University of London? • What other information is available? • Is it sufficient to match or disambiguate the identities? • Is there a website / contact details?

9. Rethinking the process • Capture information about the person, family or corporate body at the time the resource is created • Devolve responsibility to authors, publishers, researchers and academics • Libraries and bibliographic agencies focus on quality control, complex relationships and conflict resolution. • Capture information in a way that is machine intelligible. • Identification of entities not disambiguation of headings 100 10. $aLuckombe, Philip,$dd. 1803 046 ## $g1803 100 10. $aLuckombe, Philip,$dd. 1803

10. Automation • Identification • ISNI • Contextual information • FRAD, RDA, MARC 21 • Matching • VIAF, Names • Linking • Controlled vocabularies • Confidence

11. Models • Interparty - http://www.interparty.org/ • EU Project 2002-2003 • Public identities not persons • Linking not merging • Authority – i.e. who makes the assertion • FRAD Functional Requirements for Authority Data • Extension of FRBR model to authority data • Separation of names from the person, family or corporate body • Recognition of different rules http://www.ifla.org/publications/ifla-series-on-bibliographic-control-34

13. choice of access points form of headings references FRBR relationships attributes of FRAD entities FRAD relationships access points are controlled RDA will replace AACR2 RDA is based on the FRBR and FRAD Models AACR2 does not cover authority control RDA does, but doesn’t use the term authority control http://www.rda-jsc.org/

14. ISNI: International Standard Name Identifier • ISNI 1422 4586 3573 0476 • Registration Metadata • http://www.isni.org/ • Draft ISO Standard (ISO 27729) • A “bridge “ • Identification of Public Identities • Natural Persons • Legal Persons • Fictional Characters • Groups • Incorporated entities • Libraries, rights management, book trade, publishers, media content industries

15. Match & Link Authority Files Reduce costs Increase utility Retrospective alignment of bibliographic data OCLCBibliothèque nationale de FranceBibliotheca Alexandrina (Egypt)National Library of the Czech RepublicDeutsche NationalbibliothekNational Library of IsraelLibrary of Congress/NACONational Library of SwedenVatican Library VIAF: The Virtual International Authority File Prototype http://viaf.org/ Linked Data http://outgoing.typepad.com/outgoing/2009/09/viaf-as-linked-data.html

16. Names • Funded by JISC Repositories and preservation programme • Led by MIMAS • British Library is a partner • National Names Service • Phase 1 – prototype • Data model based on FRAD • Mappings from MARC 21; ISAAR CPF; SWAP; NLM DTD • Phase 2 – Develop national names service • Author submission • Institutional Repositories • UKPMC • Intute

17. It’s not just about libraries… • FO:AF Friend of a Friend • Social networking metadata • Granularity of parts of a name • http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/ • EAC-CPF: Encoded Archival Context – Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families • Communication standard for exchange of authority records • ISAAR (CPF) • Draft Standard http://eac.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/

18. Conclusion • Controlling names remains important in the context of linked data and the Semantic Web • Identification and collocation of variants is more important than establishing a preferred form • Current techniques are not scalable • Automation and participation are the way forward • Web services for identification • No simple solution • Exension of the collaborative model

19. Links and references • <EAC-CPF> Encoded Archival Context: Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families http://eac.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/ • FO:AF (Friend of a Friend) http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/ • Functional Requirements for Authority Data: a conceptual model • http://www.ifla.org/publications/ifla-series-on-bibliographic-control-34 • International Standard Names Identifier (ISNI) http://www.isni.org/ • Interparty Project • http://www.interparty.org/ • Communicating knowledge: how & why UK researchers publish & disseminate their findings • http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/documents/communicatingknowledgereport.aspx

20. Links and references • The knowledge network: British Library annual report & accounts, 2008/09 • http://www.bl.uk/about/annual/2008to2009/index.html • Library of Congress Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access Directorate • Report of Fiscal Year 2008 (Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2008) • http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/aba08.pdf • Names Project http://names.mimas.ac.uk/ • Statement of International Cataloguing Principles • http://www.ifla.org/publications/statement-of-international-cataloguing-principles • RDA: Resource Description & Access http://www.rda-jsc.org/ United Kingdom Repositories: table of record totals http://www.nostuff.org/ircount/table.php?frequency=monthly&country=uk • Virtual International Authority File: VIAF http://viaf.org/