W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > March 2011

RE: Question about MARCXML to Models transformation

From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 10:12:32 -0500
Message-ID: <52E301F960B30049ADEFBCCF1CCAEF590BB025DF@OAEXCH4SERVER.oa.oclc.org>
To: "Thomas Baker" <tbaker@tbaker.de>, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Cc: "Diane I. Hillmann" <dih1@cornell.edu>, <public-lld@w3.org>
I half agree. The guiding light for whether something is a WEM or I
isn't necessarily the class name or its definition, it's the sensibility
of properties. WEMI is what it is because the FRBR designers put careful
thought into the property names separating them: "is realized through",
"is embodied in", and "is exemplified by".

For example, this statement "makes sense" to me and I guessing everyone
else (forget FRBR for a second):

"A newspaper editorial is a realization of a opinion."

Is this use of "is a realization of" merely a pun or is its meaning the
same as that found in the FRBR model? I would argue it's the same, which
means (through domain/range settings) that an "Opinion" is a Work
(presumably in the sub-class sense) and "Newspaper Editorial" is an
"Expression" (also in the subclass sense). 

These subclass assignments may not be obvious in isolation, but when
used in statements involving properties their nature becomes clearer.

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-lld-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Thomas Baker
> Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 9:14 AM
> To: Karen Coyle
> Cc: Diane I. Hillmann; public-lld@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Question about MARCXML to Models transformation
> 
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 09:35:22AM -0800, Karen Coyle wrote:
> > I actually think that we should emphasize the "has a" rather than
"is
> > a" aspects of the resources we describe, and let the "has a" allow
us
> > to infer any number of "is a" qualities. This is the message that
Jon
> > Phipps gave at the tutorial day at DC in Pittsburgh -- that we
> > describe things by their characteristics, and those characteristics
> > tell us what the thing *is*.
> 
> Yes, that sounds right to me.  Emphasize Properties
> (relationships) over Classes. Verbs over nouns.  Describe
> things less through giving them a name -- i.e., writing a
> definition for a class of things to which they belong --
> and more through enumerating their characteristics.
> 
> --
> Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
> 
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 15:13:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 March 2011 15:13:51 GMT