An Overview of the Current State of Linked and Open Data in Cataloging

  • Irfan Ullah Department of Computer Science University of Peshawar Peshawar, 25120, Pakistan.
  • Shah Khusro Department of Computer Science University of Peshawar Peshawar, 25120, Pakistan.
  • Asim Ullah Department of Computer Science University of Peshawar Peshawar, 25120, Pakistan.
  • Muhammad Naeem Department of Computer Science University of Peshawar Peshawar, 25120, Pakistan.


Linked Open Data (LOD) is a core Semantic Web technology that makes knowledge and information spaces of different knowledge domains manageable, reusable, shareable, exchangeable, and interoperable. The LOD approach achieves this through the provision of services for describing, indexing, organizing, and retrievingknowledge artifacts and making them available for quick consumption and publication. Thisis also alignedwith the role and objective of traditional library cataloging. Owing to this link, majorlibraries of the world are transferring their bibliographic metadata to the LOD landscape. Some developments in this direction include the replacement of Anglo-American Cataloging Rules 2nd Edition by the Resource Description and Access (RDA) and the trend towards the wideradoption of BIBFRAME 2.0. An interestingand related development in this respect arethe discussions among knowledge resources managers and library community on the possibility of enriching bibliographic metadata with socially curated or user-generated content. The popularity of Linked Open Data and its benefit to librarians and knowledge management professionals warrant a comprehensive survey of the subject. Althoughseveral reviews and survey articles on the application of Linked Data principles to cataloging have appeared in literature, a generic yet holistic review of the current state of Linked and Open Data in cataloging is missing. To fill the gap, the authors have collected recent literature (2014–18) on the current state of Linked Open Data in cataloging to identify research trends, challenges, and opportunities in this area and, in addition, to understand the potential of socially curated metadata in cataloging mainlyin the realm of the Web of Data. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this review article is the first of its kind that holistically treats the subject of cataloging in the Linked and Open Data environment. Some of the findings of the review are: Linked and Open Data is becoming the mainstream trend in library cataloging especially in the major libraries and research projects of the world; with the emergence of Linked Open Vocabularies (LOV), the bibliographic metadata is becoming more meaningful and reusable; and, finally, enriching bibliographic metadata with user-generated content is gaining momentum.Conclusions drawn from the study include the need for a focus on the quality of catalogued knowledge and the reduction of the barriers to the publication and consumption of such knowledge, and the attention on the part of library community to the learning from the successful adoption of LOD in other application domains and contributing collaboratively to the global scale activity of cataloging.


María Hallo et al., “Current State of Linked Data in Digital Libraries,” Journal of Information Science 42, no. 2 (2016):117–27,

Tim Berners-Lee, “Design Issues: Linked Data,” W3C, 2006, updated June18, 2009, accessed November 09, 2018,

Yuji Tosaka and Jung-ran Park, “RDA: Resource Description & Access—A Survey of the Current State of the Art,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64, no. 4 (2013): 651–62,

Angela Kroeger, “The Road to BIBFRAME: The Evolution of the Idea of Bibliographic Transition into a Post-MARC Future,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 51, no. (2013): 873–90.

Martin Doerr et al., “The Europeana Data Model (EDM).” Paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress: 76th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Gothenburg, Sweden, August 10–15, 2010.

Getaneh Alemu and Brett Stevens, An Emergent Theory of Digital Library Metadata—Enrich then Filter,1st Edition (Waltham, MA: Chandos Publishing, Elsevier Ltd. 2015).

Kim Tallerås, “Quality of Linked Bibliographic Data: The Models, Vocabularies, and Links of Data Sets Published by Four National Libraries,” Journal of Library Metadata 17, no. 2 (2017):126–55,

Becky Yoose and Jody Perkins, “The Linked Open Data Landscape in Libraries and Beyond,” Journal of Library Metadata 13, no. 2–3 (2013): 197–211,

Robert Fox, “From Strings to Things,” Digital Library Perspectives 32, no. 1 (2016): 2–6,

Stanislava Gardašević, “Semantic Web and Linked (Open) Data Possibilities and Prospects for Libraries,” INFOtheca—Journal of Informatics & Librarianship 14, no. 1 (2013): 26–36,

Thomas Baker, Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche, and Bernard Vatant, “Requirements for Vocabulary Preservation and Governance,” Library Hi Tech 31, no. 4 (2013): 657-68,

Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche et al., “Linked Open Vocabularies (LOV): A Gateway to Reusable Semantic Vocabularies on the Web,” Semantic Web 8, no. 3 (2017): 437–45,

Amanda Sprochi, “Where Are We Headed? Resource Description and Access, Bibliographic Framework, and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Library Reference Model,” International Information & Library Review 48, no. 2 (2016): 129–36,

Brighid M.Gonzales, “Linking Libraries to the Web: Linked Data and the Future of the Bibliographic Record,” Information Technology and Libraries 33, no. 4 (2014): 10,

Shoichi Taniguchi, “Is BIBFRAME 2.0 a Suitable Schema for Exchanging and Sharing Diverse Descriptive Metadata about Bibliographic Resources?,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 56, no. 1 (2018): 40–61,

Shoichi Taniguchi, “BIBFRAME and Its Issues: From the Viewpoint of RDA Metadata,” Journal of Information Processing and Management 58, no. 1 (2015): 20–27,

Shoichi Taniguchi, “Examining BIBFRAME 2.0 from the Viewpoint of RDA Metadata Schema,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 55, no. 6 (2017): 387–412,

Nosheen Fayyaz, Irfan Ullah, and Shah Khusro, “On the Current State of Linked Open Data: Issues, Challenges, and Future Directions,” International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS) 14, no. 4 (2018): 110–28,

Asim Ullah, Shah Khusro, and Irfan Ullah, “Bibliographic Classification in the Digital Age: Current Trends & Future Directions,” Information Technology and Libraries 36, no. 3 (2017): 48–77,

IFLA, “IFLA Conceptual Models,” The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), 2017, updated April 06, 2009, accessed November 12, 2018,

Michael John Khoo et al., “Augmenting Dublin Core Digital Library Metadata with Dewey Decimal Classification,” Journal of Documentation 71, no. 5 (2015): 976–98.

Ulli Waltinger et al., “Hierarchical Classification of Oai Metadata Using the DDC Taxonomy,” in Advanced Language Technologies for Digital Libraries, edited by Raffaella Bernardi, Frederique Segond and Ilya Zaihrayeu. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Lncs), 29–40: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011

Aaron Krowne and Martin Halbert, “An Initial Evaluation of Automated Organization for Digital Library Browsing,” Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, Denver, CO, USA, June 7–11, 2005 2005

LOC, “MARC Standards: MARC21 Formats,” Library of Congress (LOC), 2013, updated March 14, 2013, accessed January 2, 2014,

Philip E Schreur, “Linked Data for Production and the Program for Cooperative Cataloging,” PCC Policy Committee Meeting, 2017, accessed May 18, 2018,

Sarah Bull and Amanda Quimby, “A Renaissance in Library Metadata? The Importance of Community Collaboration in a Digital World,” Insights 29, no. 2 (2016): 146–53,

Philip E. Schreur, “Linked Data for Production,” PCC Policy Committee Meeting, 2015, accessed November 09, 2018,

Sam Gyun Oh, Myongho Yi, and Wonghong Jang, “Deploying Linked Open Vocabulary (LOV) to Enhance Library Linked Data,” Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice 2, no. 2 (2015): 6–15,

Carlo Bianchini and Mauro Guerrini, “A Turning Point for Catalogs: Ranganathan’s Possible Point of View,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 53, no. 3-4 (2015): 341–51,

LOC, “Library of Congress Linked Data Service,” The Library of Congress, accessed March 24, 2018,

Margaret E Dull, “Moving Metadata Forward with BIBFRAME: An Interview with Rebecca Guenther,” Serials Review 42, no. 1 (2016): 65–69,

LOC, “Overview of the BIBFRAME 2.0 Model,” Library of Congress, April 21, 2016, accessed November 09, 2018,

OCLC. 2016, “OCLC Linked Data Research,” Online Computer Library Center (OCLC),

Jeff Mister, “Turning Bibliographic Metadata into Actionable Knowledge,” Next Blog—OCLC, February 29, 2016,

George Campbell, Karen Coombs, and Hank Sway, “OCLC Linked Data,” OCLC Developer Network, March 26, 2018,

Roy Tennant, “Getting Started with Linked Data,” NEXT Blog—OCLC, February 8, 2016,

DBLP, “DBLP Computer Science Bibliography: Frequently Asked Questions,” Digital Bibliography & Library Project (DBLP), updated November 07, 2018, accessed 08 November 2018.

Jörg Diederich, Wolf-Tilo Balke, and Uwe Thaden, “Demonstrating the Semantic Growbag: Automatically Creating Topic Facets for Faceteddblp,” Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, Vancouver, Canada, June 17–22, 2007.

Baker Thomas, Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche, and Bernard Vatant, “Requirements for Vocabulary Preservation and Governance,” Library Hi Tech 31, no. 4 (2013): 657–68,

Erik Radio and Scott Hanrath, “Measuring the Impact and Effectiveness of Transitioning to a Linked Data Vocabulary,” Journal of Library Metadata 16, no. 2 (2016): 80–94,

Yhna Therese P. Santos, “Resource Description and Access in the Eyes of the Filipino Librarian: Perceived Advantages and Disadvantages,” Journal of Library Metadata 18, no. 1 (2017): 45–56,

Philomena W. Mwaniki, “Envisioning the Future Role of Librarians: Skills, Services and Information Resources,” Library Management 39, no. 1, 2 (2018): 2–11,

Caitlin Tillman, Joseph Hafner, and Sharon Farnel, “Forming the Canadian Linked Data Initiative,” Paper presented at the the 37th International Association of Scientific and Technological University Libraries 2016 (IATUL 2016) Conference, Dalhousie University Libraries in Halifax, Nova Scotia, June 5–9, 2016.

Carol Jean Godby, Shenghui Wang, and Jeffrey K Mixter, Library Linked Data in the Cloud: OCLC's Experiments with New Models of Resource Description. Vol. 5, Synthesis Lectures on the Semantic Web: Theory and Technology, San Rafael, California (USA),Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2015,

Sofia Zapounidou, Michalis Sfakakis, and Christos Papatheodorou, “Highlights of Library Data Models in the Era of Linked Open Data,” Paper presented at the The 7th Metadata and Semantics Research Conference, MTSR 2013, Thessaloniki, Greece, November 19–22, 2013

Timothy W. Cole et al., “Library MARC Records Into Linked Open Data: Challenges and Opportunities,” Journal of Library Metadata 13, no. 2–3 (2013): 163–96,

Kim Tallerås, “From Many Records to One Graph: Heterogeneity Conflicts in the Linked Data Restructuring Cycle, Information Research 18, no. 3 (2013) paper C18, accessed November 10, 2018.

Fabiano Ferreira de Castro, “Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Description in Digital Environments,” Transinformação 28, no. 2 (2016): 223–31.

Karim Tharani, “Linked Data in Libraries: A Case Study of Harvesting and Sharing Bibliographic Metadata with Bibframe,” Information Technology and Libraries 34, no. 1 (2015): 5–15.

Karen Smith-Yoshimura, “Analysis of International Linked Data Survey for Implementers,” D-Lib Magazine, 2016, July/August 2016.

Aikaterini K. Kalou, Dimitrios A. Koutsomitropoulos, and Georgia D. Solomou, “Combining the Best of Both Worlds: A Semantic Web Book Mashup as a Linked Data Service Over CMS Infrastructure,” Journal of Library Metadata 16, no. 3–4 (2016): 228–49,

IFLA, “Linked Open Data: Challenges arising,” The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), 2014, accessed March 03, 2018,

Karen Smith-Yoshimura, “Linked Data Survey results 4–Why and What Institutions are Publishing (Updated),” Hanging Together the OCLC Research blog, September 3, 2014, accessed November 12, 2018,

Carol Jean Godby and Karen Smith‐Yoshimura, “From Records to Things: Managing the Transition from Legacy Library Metadata to Linked Data,” Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology 43, no. 2 (2017): 18–23,

Silvia B. Southwick, Cory K Lampert, and Richard Southwick, “Preparing Controlled Vocabularies for Linked Data: Benefits and Challenges,” Journal of Library Metadata 15, no. 3–4 (2015): 177–190,

Robin Hastings, “Feature: Linked Data in Libraries: Status and Future Direction,” Computers in Libraries (Magzine Article), 2015,

Jung-Ran Park, “Metadata Quality in Digital Repositories: A Survey of the Current State of the Art,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 47, no. 3–4 (2009): 213–28,

Karen Snow, “Defining, Assessing, and Rethinking Quality Cataloging,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 55, no. 7–8 (2017): 438–55,

David Van Kleeck et al., “Managing Bibliographic Data Quality for Electronic Resources,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 55, no. 7-8 (2017): 560–77,

NISO, A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections, ed. NISO Framework Advisory Group, 3rd ed (Baltimore, MD: National Information Standards Organization, 2007),

Pascal Hitzler and Krzysztof Janowicz, “Linked Data, Big Data, and the 4th Paradigm,” Semantic Web 4, no. 3 (2013): 233–35,

Alberto Petrucciani, “Quality of Library Catalogs and Value of (Good) Catalogs,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 53, no. 3–4 (2015): 303–13.

Han, Myung-Ja, “New Discovery Services and Library Bibliographic Control,” Library Trends 61, no. 1 (2012):162–72,

Lorri Mon, Social Media and Library Services, Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services, ed. Gary Marchionini, 40, San Rafael, California (USA), Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2015),

Marijn Koolen et al., “Overview of the CLEF 2016 Social Book Search Lab,” Paper presented at the 7th International Conference of the Cross-Language Evaluation Forum for European Languages, Évora, Portugal, September 5–8, 2016

Koolen et al., “Overview of the CLEF 2015 Social Book Search Lab,” Paper presented at the 6th International Conference of the Cross-Language Evaluation Forum for European Languages, Toulouse, France, September 8–11, 2015

Patrice Bellot et al., “Overview of INEX 2014,” Paper presented at the International Conference of the Cross-Language Evaluation Forum for European Languages, Sheffield, UK, September 15–18, 2014

Bo-Wen Zhang, Xu-Cheng Yin, and Fang Zhou, “A Generic Pseudo Relevance Feedback Framework with Heterogeneous Social Information,” Information Sciences 367–68 (2016): 909–26,

Xu-Cheng Yin et al., “ISART: A Generic Framework for Searching Books with Social Information,” PLOS ONE 11, no. 2 (2016): e0148479,

Faten Hamad and Bashar Al-Shboul, “Exploiting Social Media and Tagging for Social Book Search: Simple Query Methods for Retrieval Optimization,” in Social Media Shaping E-Publishing and Academia, edited by Nashrawan Tahaet al., 107–17 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017).

Marijn Koolen, “User Reviews in the Search Index? That’ll Never Work!” Paper presented at the 36th European Conference on IR Research (ECIR 2014), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, April 13–16, 2014.

Lucy Clements and Chern Li Liew, “Talking about Tags: An Exploratory Study of Librarians’ Perception and Use of Social Tagging in a Public Library,” The Electronic Library 34, no. 2 (2016): 289–301,

Sharon Farnel, “Understanding Community Appropriate Metadata through Bernstein’s Theory of Language Codes,” Journal of Library Metadata 17, no. 1 (2017): 5–18,

Getaneh Alemu et al., “Toward an Emerging Principle of Linking Socially-Constructed Metadata,” Journal of Library Metadata 14, no. 2 (2014): 103–29,

Getaneh Alemu, “A Theory of Metadata Enriching and Filtering: Challenges and Opportunities to Implementation,” Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries 5, no. 2 (2017): 311–34,

How to Cite
Ullah, I., Khusro, S., Ullah, A., & Naeem, M. (2018). An Overview of the Current State of Linked and Open Data in Cataloging. Information Technology and Libraries, 37(4), 47-80.