What we want to do

The metadata landscape in the cultural heritage community has evolved significantly since MODS and MADS were first designed. At this point it is clear there is value in a clearly and intentionally articulated formal data model to define these formats, upon which can be defined various encoding options. The expression of a data model as RDF classes and properties is a common technique in this community, and upon initial analysis appears to be a fruitful direction for MODS and MADS. It is likely that a formal application profile for the encoding of bibliographic information would be beneficial to current MODS implementers as well.

This work is planned to occur in stages:

1. Analyze current MODS and MADS XML Schemas to determine the semantics behind the XML encoding
2. Articulate these semantics as RDF classes and properties
3. Connect (using RDF mechanisms) the MODS RDF classes and properties to RDF related classes and properties from other sources
4. Provide written guidance for MODS XML implementers in how to achieve the semantics of legacy XML records in the new form
5. (possibly) Create other data encodings for the MODS classes and properties defined in RDF 
6. (possibly) Articulate a formal application profile for the use of RDF classes and properties from a variety of sources to create robust linked bibliographic and authority descriptions

Many features of MODS exist in close or loose matches in other RDF vocabularies. We hope to achieve maximum flexibility by defining all significant classes and properties implied by the existing XML encoding in a MODS RDF namespace, but also making large numbers of connections to other vocabularies (BIBO, ISBD in RDF, FRBR in RDF, RDA in RDF, etc.).

Discussion documents (beware! under constant revision)

• Primary MODS element analysis - into RDF classes and properties (from LC)
• Additional MODS attributes left out of initial element analysis document (from LC)
• Portion of MODS as OWL Ontology (from MODS/MADS EC member Jon Stroop)
• (etc.)