A comparative analysis and evaluation of bibliographic ontologies

This paper evaluates two bibliographic ontologies developed by computer scientists alone, without the contributions of knowledge organization (KO) scholars: the Bibliographic Ontology (Bibo) and FaBiO (FRBR-aligned Bibliographic Ontology). The aim of the study is to analyse their classes and properties, evaluate the use of the categories in Bibo, verify the alignment with FRBR in FaBiO, and check the consistency of the definitions of the classes with the categories that belong to the catalographic field. Finally, the study evaluates the properties presented in Bibo and FaBiO checking them against the properties in Bibframe 2.0. The paper presents tables of comparison between the classes of FaBiO and the FRBR categories, also considering the IFLA-LRM high-level conceptual model. Moreover, it offers a mapping between FaBiO and Bibo properties and the Bibframe 2.0 properties, stressing the low number of properties of FaBiO and Bibo compared with Bibframe 2.0 properties.