Abstract
AbstractThe two bibliographical models currently informing the design of systems for the representation of bibliographical data – the IFLA Library Reference Model (IFLA‐LRM) and BIBFRAME 2.0 – do not seamlessly map onto one another. In particular, there are conceptual problems in mapping between the bibliographical entity BIBFRAME:Work and its counterparts, IFLA‐LRM:Work and IFLA‐LRM:Expression. To mitigate these difficulties, we argue for applying a set‐theoretical framework to the mapping between BIBFRAME:Work and IFLA‐LRM:Work and IFLA‐LRM:Expression.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
