- From: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 02:26:58 +0100
- To: Ross Singer <rossfsinger@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Panzer,Michael" <panzerm@oclc.org>, Ryan Shaw <ryanshaw@ischool.berkeley.edu>, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, public-lod@w3.org
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Ross Singer<rossfsinger@gmail.com> wrote: > Anyway, yes, I think some more thought needs to go into Dewey and > LCSH's relationship to the "real world". I think http://www.flickr.com/photos/danbri/3282565132 might be relevant here The classification that danbri uses in that diagram is quite interesting. I paraphrase them as: things, types, web documents (or information resources) and conceptualizations. I'm not attempting to define them at the moment. I tried to enumerate how these four categories interelate: things <-> things via general rdf properties things <-> types via rdf:type things <-> web documents via foaf:topic/foaf:isTopicOf/rdfs:seeAlso web documents <-> types via rdf:type, maybe via foaf:topic if the document is describing the type web documents <-> conceptualizations via dc:subject web documents <-> web documents via rdfs:seeAlso etc types <-> types via rdfs:subClassOf conceptualizations <-> conceptualizations via skos:broader/skos:narrower/etc. A couple were missing: For things <-> conceptualizations I recently created ov:category [1] and ov:isCategoryOf [2] which I used in productdb.org to link things with their categories (e.g. http://productdb.org/2006-honda-element). Using dc:subject didn't seem right - does a model of car have a subject? This is what I would suggest you use to relate an author to a category about them. The other one that is missing is types <-> conceptualization SKOS says there is no defined relationship [3]. Interestingly the RDF Semantics has this to say [4]: "RDFS classes can be considered to be rather more than simple sets; they can be thought of as 'classifications' or 'concepts' which have a robust notion of identity which goes beyond a simple extensional correspondence. " > > -Ross. > Ian [1] http://open.vocab.org/terms/category [2] http://open.vocab.org/terms/isCategoryOf [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#L896 [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#technote
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 01:27:39 UTC