Bibliographic References

[sheharbano96]

At the V&A, we are currently working on modelling the bibliographic references field and have encountered an edge case that requires clarification. Specifically, we need to address how to handle the details sub-field when structured references aren't always present or sufficient. Additionally, we would appreciate input on the validity of our overall mapping approach for this field. If our approach is not suitable, we would welcome suggestions on the best way to map it.

Here’s an example of a bibliographic reference from our data

      { 
        "reference": { 
          "text": "Hobbs, Anne Stevenson, and Joyce Irene Whalley, eds. \u003Cu\u003EBeatrix Potter: the V & A collection : the Leslie Linder bequest of Beatrix Potter material : watercolours, drawings, manuscripts, books, photographs and memorabilia.\u003C/u\u003E London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1985.", 
          "id": "AUTH315806" 
        }, 
        "details": "p.68; no.665", 
        "free": "Hobbs, Anne Stevenson, and Joyce Irene Whalley, eds. Beatrix Potter: the V & A collection: the Leslie Linder bequest of Beatrix Potter material: watercolours, drawings, manuscripts, books, photographs and memorabilia. London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1985. p.68; no.665" 
      } 
    ] 

And here’s how we have mapped it to Linked.Art:

            "type": "LinguisticObject", 
            "_label": "Article about Painting", 
            "classified_as": [ 
                { 
                    "id": "http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300311705", 
                    "type": "Type", 
                    "_label": "citations", 
                    "classified_as": [ 
                        { 
                            "id": "http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300418049", 
                            "type": "Type", 
                            "_label": "Brief Text" 
                        } 
                    ] 
                } 
            ], 
            "content": "Hobbs, Anne Stevenson, and Joyce Irene Whalley, eds. Beatrix Potter: the V & A collection: the Leslie Linder bequest of Beatrix Potter material: watercolours, drawings, manuscripts, books, photographs and memorabilia. London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1985. p.68; no.665" 
        } 

There are two issues to look at here:

1. Is this mapping acceptable in Linked.Art? And are there other ways to map it without having to add additional textual work instances?
2. The second question is about the details subfield:
   In the details subfield, if the source work is being referenced in full, this is a straightforward binary relationship between the object and the publication.
   However, when details include page numbers or catalogue entries (e.g., "p.68; no.665"), should these be modelled as:
   • A separate record for the specific page or section, which will be the child record of the reference?
   • Or is it sufficient to include the detail text as a property of the reference relationship?

We’d appreciate any recommendations on when to break out parts of a cited work into separate nodes.

[azaroth42]

1. Yes. That's also exactly what we do with citations in LUX. And no, there's no other way to map it without extracting the knowledge from the content and creating a textual work.
2. There's only a string, so there's no possibility of subfields. The page numbers are in the "free" already content already, so there's nothing left to do. The LinguisticObject here is not the work, it's the content of the citation string. (c.f. the issue about whether there should be a Statement subclass of LinguisticObject to make the distinction clearer, but the decision was (probably correctly) that as there aren't new properties for statements, there's no need for a subclass)