FRBR OO , a Conceptual Model for Performing Arts

1. FRBROO, a Conceptual Model for Performing Arts Martin Doerr*, Patrick LeBoeuf**, Chrysoula Bekiari* * Center for Cultural Informatics Institute of Computer Science Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas ** Bibliotheque National de France, Paris, France Athens, September 16, 2008

2. Documenting Performing ArtsIntroduction • Who documents and preserves knowledge about Performing Arts? • Performing Arts is an expression of culture, • but it is not objects and not literature. • It is planned, heard and seen and then gone. • It may use objects and literature. • It may leave recorded memories and other traces of activities behind. • Records and objects may be found across museums, archives, libraries. Any institution would document differently. How to recognize the common facts behind? • We need to understand the relationships between museums, archives, libraries documentation. Performing Arts is a good showcase.

3. Archive, Library, Museum Information • The typical library contents: “The whole stories” • Secondary literature (research results) • Facts brought into causal context • Categorical: theories and hypotheses • Fiction. • The typical archive contents: “The needle in the haystack” • Primary sources, “bits and pieces”(letters, legal documents, administration acts, images, scientific records). • factual, kept in the sequence of creation, as by the creator or responsible. • The typical museum information: “Museum objects rarely talk” • Factualdocumentation of properties and context per object, references, classification • Highly heterogeneous, disparate.

4. Museum Information “A Monet is not like a Dinosaur” • Museum objects may be: • Unique in form,valuableout of context • Valued art objects: “La Pie by Monet”, aesthetic minerals, exceptional life forms, curiosities. Could be a • Uniqueby particular context,not valuableout of context, valuable only asillustration or symbol, • Historical heirlooms, relics of saints, “John Lennon’s T-Shirt” • Not unique, not particularly valuable. Used asexampleof a category out of the particular context • Most objects in Natural History, ethnology, archeology. • Uniquebyrarity,valuable asevidenceout of a particular context • Most objects in paleontology, many unique archeological objects: “6th left rib from a T. Rex”

5. Information Integration ManagementObjects and Knowledge • The ultimate goal of users seeking information is not to get an “object” but to understand a topic. • Understanding lives from relationships: • objects are interpreted by context (e.g., bone finds inEvan’s “bathtubs”) • contexts are interpreted by objects (e.g., many arrowheads in Troy IV) • objects are interpreted by categories (e.g., Evan’s Minoan “bathtubs”) • categories are supported by examples (e.g., the shape of a kris) • categories may be based on rare evidence (e.g., a hominid tooth) • We need to integrate museum, archives, libraries in a sensible way to find integrated knowledgeand produce new knowledge, to provideevidence for new hypotheses or verify or challenge old hypotheses.

6. Information Integration ManagementLibrary and Museum Information • Museum and library information has complex interrelations. Museum and library information overlaps, and otherwise is different. • Libraries document literature in order to facilitate access to it. • Museum documentation classifies and describes museum objects, their context and relevance. It refers to literature. Museums produceregularly (secondary) literature. • Museum objects are referred to and published in literature. Literature may describe museum objects, their context and theories about and related to them. Literature describes concepts that are exemplified or illustrated by museum objects.No standard documentation format yet for that! • Libraries may also produce literature. Libraries may document and curate rare objects as museums do. Most museums maintain libraries.

7. Information Integration ManagementRelations of Archive, Library and Museum Information Libraries Museums publish document features & context provide finding aids illustrate, exemplify using refer to Books Objects are about make narratives from provide finding aids Archives primary Documents

8. The FRBR - CRM HarmonizationThe Harmonization Project • Formation in 2003 of the International Working Group on FRBR/CIDOC CRM Harmonisation: • A collaboration of CIDOC CRM-SIG and the IFLA FRBR Review Group. • To express the IFLA FRBR model with the concepts, ontological methodology and notation conventions provided by the CIDOC CRM. • To facilitate the integration, mediation and interchange of bibliographic and museum information. • Summer 2008, complete text “FRBROO” reviewed by IFLA. Definition available as text in the format of the CRM. • Other forms: A comprehensive text with all related CRM definitions and complete mappings FRBRER to FRBROO, OWL/RDF files, VISIO graphics. • Work continues with an “FRBR Core” model, as extension of CRM Core.

9. The FRBR - CRM HarmonizationCRM • The CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM) • developed since 1996 by CIDOC / ISO TC46, now ISO 21127:2006 • a core ontology aiming to integrate cultural heritage information • Innovations: • centre descriptions not around the things, but around the events that connect people, material and immaterial things in space-time. • explicit description of the discourse on relations between identifiers and the identified. • typologies modeled both as classification means and as objects of the cultural-historical discourse. • Covers performances as activities, but lacks a model of intellectual work.

10. The FRBR - CRM HarmonizationCRM: history as meetings t Victory!!! coherence volume of second announcement coherence volume of first announcement 2nd Athenian Victory!!! 1st Athenian other Soldiers runner coherence volume of the battle of Marathon Marathon S Athens

11. The FRBR - CRM HarmonizationFRBR • The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) • developed 1992-1997 by IFLA, now being complemented by the Functional Requirements for Authority Files (FRAR) • A core ER model to integrate library objects by content relation • Intended to formulate a new library practice • Innovations: • Definition of stages/ abstraction levels of intellectual products: Work, Expression, Manifestation, Item. • Clusters publications and items around the notion of derivation, complement and common conceptual origin across stages / abstraction levels. • Lacks: explicit notion of the processes behind. Partially ambiguous definitions (overgeneralization). • Thought to cover performing arts, but cannot describe temporality (events).

12. The FRBR - CRM HarmonizationFRBR : Abstraction Levels has part has a complement has a successor has a summary has a supplement has a transformation has adaptation has an imitation “a distinct intellectual or artistic creation… there is no single material object one can point to as the work...” Work isrealized through (is a realization of) has part “the intellectual or artistic realization of a work in the form of alpha-numeric, musical, or choreographic notation, sound, image, object, movement, etc” has a complement has a successor has a summary has a supplement has a transformation has adaptation has an imitation Expression isembodied in (is the embodiment of ) “the physical embodiment of an expression of a work…all the physical objects that bear the same characteristics… …may be only a single physical exemplar…” has part Manifestation isexemplified by (exemplifies ) has part “a single exemplar of a manifestation...” Item

13. The FRBR - CRM HarmonizationResults: The “externalization” process E65 Creation E12 Production E28 Conceptual Object F31 Expression Creation F40 Carrier Production Event F3 Manifestation Production Type R9 comprises carriers of R41 produced (was produced by) R49 created a realization of R22 created E24 Physical Man-Made Thing F1 Work E84 Information Carrier F2 Expression R45 created R10 belongs to type R56 is realized in F23 Expression Fragment F21 Complex Work F46 Individual Work F20 Self Contained Expression F4 Manifestation Singleton F5 Item

14. A Model of Performing Arts: Incorporation – a new relationship • R2 is derivative of (has derivative): • R2.1 has type: • R1 is logical successor of (has successor): • R2.1 has type: • R14 incorporates (is incorporated in): This property associates an instance of F22 Self-Contained Expression with an instance of F2 Expression that was included in it and that is a realisation of an independent work. The incorporated expression may be self-contained or fragmentary. “has a summary” “has a transformation” “has adaptation” “has an imitation” “has a complement” “has a successor” “has a supplement”

15. A Model of Performing Arts: Basic Classes Conceptual Objects Activities F20 Performance Work F2 Expression R19 created a realisation of (was realised through) R12 is realised in (realises) R14 incorporates (is incorporated in) F28 Expression Creation R17 created (was created by) F25 Performance Plan R25 performed (was performed in) F31 Performance R66 recorded (was recorded though) COLLOCATION! R22 realised (was realised through) F21 Recording Work F29 Recording Event (performances may not be recorded) R13 is realised in (realises) R21 created (was created by) R14 incorporates (is incorporated in) Participants may write up other memories F26 Recording

16. A Model of Performing Arts: Derivation and Incorporation Chains F21 Complex Work Henry IV F54 Container Work R12 has member (is member of) R12 has member (is member of) R12 has member (is member of) F46 Individual Work Henry IV part 1 F46 Individual Work Henry IV part 2 R1 has logical successor R58 derivative of (has derivative) F46 Individual Work Henry IV part 1 Adaptation F51 Performance Work Henry IV part 1 idea of mise-en-scene F53 Recording Work Henry IV part 1 recording work R68 realised ( was realised through) R49 created a realisation of (was realised through) R49 created a realisation of (was realised through) F55 Recording Event Recording Performance 25/12/07 F31 Expression Creation Expression creation of Adaptation of Henry IV part 1 F31 Expression Creation Expression creation of Henry IV part 1 mise-en-scene R66 recorded (was recorded though) F52 Performance Performance 25/12/07 R70 is realised in (realises) R56 is realised in (realises) R69 is realised in (realises) R22 created (was created by) R22 created (was created by) R64 performed (was performed in) R67 created (was created by) F20 Self-Contained Expression Henry IV part 1 Adaptation Text F50 Performance Plan Henry IV part 1 “mise-en-scene” F56 Recording DVD Henry IV part 1 Play 25/12/07 R63 incorporates (is incorporated in) R63 incorporates (is incorporated in)

17. F20 Performance Work F25 Performance Plan E24 Physical Man-Made Thing E24 Physical Man-Made Thing E33 Linguistic Object E24 Physical Man-Made Thing E24 Physical Man-Made Thing Sergei Radlov's conceptions about how to stage King Lear Sergei Radlov's indications about how to perform King Lear Wooden model elements held at BnF Photographs held at BnF Manuscript held at BnF S. Galkin's Yiddish translation of King Lear Manuscriptscore held at BnF F52 Performance at the Moscow State Jewish Theatre, 1935 E31 Document E38 Image E73 Information Object E38 Image Lev Pulver'sincidental music A. Tyshler'sstage setting Visual contentof photographs A Model of Performing Arts: A Documentation Case R12 is realized in (realizes) R25 performed(was performed in) P129 is about(is subject of) R14 incorporates (is incorporated in) P70 documents(is documented in) E33 Linguistic Object English comments by Edward Gordon Craig on the performances of King Lear at the Moscow State Jewish Theatre in 1935 in Radlov’s mise-en-scène P128 carries(is carried by) P128 carries(is carried by) P128 carries(is carried by) P128 carries(is carried by)

18. A Model of Performing Arts Conclusions • Documenting Performing Arts is confusing: Conceptions, repeated patterns, recordings, and the actual volatile events are hard to distinguish in our mind. • CRM & FRBROO form a consistent whole: • CRM already captures consistently the event aspect: participants (actors, recorders, audience), used things, space and time. • FRBR adds the intellectual work chain. • FRBRoo detects a new relationship of intellectual products: The recording may “incorporate”, rather than “represent” the performance plan. • Recording and performance are seen as one coherent activity. • To our knowledge the most comprehensive model for documenting performing arts in ALM. • A nice example how archive, museum and library information can be integrated based on sense making relations.