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

Re: is FRBR relevant?

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:52:11 -0700
Message-ID: <20100812125211.dyi65r04gkcc4c0w@kcoyle.net>
To: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Cc: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider@deri.org>, public-xg-lld@w3.org
BTW, there is the beginning of a formal definition of FRSAD, but it  
looks like it may not yet be complete:


There is a property "has Type of nomen" that may hold the key. As  
usual, Gordon is the one with all of the information :-).


Quoting Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>:

> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:35:06PM -0700, Karen Coyle wrote:
>> >Also, I thought frsad:Nomen was analogous to a SKOS label,
>> >not a concept (i.e., the range of frsad:soundLabel, not
>> >the domain).  Do I have it backwards?
>> Tom, the definitions of Thema and Nomen are:
>> Thema: any entity used as a subject of a work
>> Nomen: any sign or sequence of signs (alphanumeric characters,
>> symbols, sound, etc.) by
>> which a thema is known, referred to or addressed as.
>> I read this to mean that Thema = concept, but I'm less sure about
>> Nomen because it appears that the term Nomen covers both identifier
>> and a prefLabel (see section 6.2 where it gives the attributes of
>> Nomen as "identifier" and "controlled name").
> Thank you, Karen.
> I'm not seeing any reason why Antoine's suggested:
>     skosxl:Label rdfs:subClassOf frsad:Nomen .
> would not work.
> Tom
> --
> Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Thursday, 12 August 2010 19:52:49 UTC

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