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

Re: reconciliation of disparate models - Jon

From: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 19:42:37 -0400
To: public-lld@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110313234237.GE5764@octavius>

    "the FRBR model only allows a linear set of relationships" should read "the
    FRBRer model only allows a linear set of relationships" and this is true. My
    point was that FRBRer is not the only useful FRBR model. It's not even the
    best FRBR model, but it happens to fit an E-R paradigm that's comfortable to
    people used to thinking in terms of discrete records. If a 'manifestation'
    isn't an entity but is merely a level of abstraction, a categorization of
    properties that are applied to a bibliographic thing, then there's no
    hierarchic requirement that such a 'thing' actually exist. There's simply
    some temporarily missing data (this is why RDF stinks for data creation and

    There's no 'dependency issue' because there are _no dependencies_ in an open
    world graph. The reason this is 'inconceivable' is directly to this notion
    of hierarchic dependencies and not to the network model they're presenting.

Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Received on Sunday, 13 March 2011 23:43:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:27:43 UTC