W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > August 2010

RE: is FRBR relevant?

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:55:39 -0700
Message-ID: <20100809195539.32w5x3o46c0gg0k0@kcoyle.net>
To: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>
Cc: public-xg-lld@w3.org
Quoting "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>:

> "frbr:hasAsSubject rdfs:range owl:Thing ."

You probably got that from the vocab.org definition of frbr. The IFLA  
version does not have that. In fact, the IFLA version doesn't have  
"hasAsSubject." It has a series of "hasAsSubject([FRBR entity])", e.g.  
"hasAsSubject(Person)" "hasAsSubject(Place)".[1]

I'm not saying I like this, but this is IFLA's definition, and they  
are the ones developing the FRs.

[1] http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/list/page/3/schema_id/5.html

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Tuesday, 10 August 2010 02:56:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:55 UTC