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 15:11:39 -0700
Message-ID: <20100812151139.xa7ep3kbb4c8oo4c@kcoyle.net>
To: "ZENG, MARCIA" <mzeng@kent.edu>
Cc: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider@deri.org>, "public-xg-lld@w3.org" <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Quoting "ZENG, MARCIA" <mzeng@kent.edu>:

> MZ: I may have lost tracking the discussions today.  I just want to
> mention one thing I discussed before in my previous email, the
> frsad:Nomen type 'identifier' is one example of a type of nomen.
> It could be a common kind of identifier we have
> seen, such as the Chemical Registry Number of any chemical
> compound.

Thanks, Marcia. This is a different meaning of "identifier" than I was  
assuming. It does, therefore, seem that frsad:Nomen and skos:Label may  
be the same, with the frsad properties of Type, etc., being  
sub-properties of Nomen. frsad:Nomen:identifier appears to be a  
prefLabel that follows a particular defined scheme. In that case,  
frsad:Nomen:identifier could be a sub-property of skos:Label.


  However this is not to be mixed with an 'identifier'
> that represent a thema's location or placeholder in a database or
> Any implmentation.  I would compare this with the situation of
> skos:Concept.  Each skos:Concept is usually represented by an
> identifier (including URI), but this identifier is not a part of
> a conceptual model, i.e., it is not modeled as a property
> of a skos:Concept in the SKOS reference.
> One reason to provide examples of these values for a nomen type is   
> that we were asked by some reviewers to
> map FRSAD to FRAD which had been released just before our draft   
> report was released for review.
> The relationship of FRSAD with FRAD is explained in FRSAD appendix B  
>  while some statements
> were also included in the main body of the report.
> I hope this clears the question you had in your message.
> I will catch up with other discussion issues later.
> Marcia
>> To be clear, I was picturing:
>>     [instance of Thema]          ex:soundLabel       [instance of Nomen]
>>     [instance of Nomen]          ex:soundForm        (serialization  
>>  of sound)
>> analogously to:
>>     [instance of skos:Concept]   skosxl:prefLabel    [instance of
>> skosxl:Label]
>>     [instance of skosxl:Label]   skosxl:literalForm  (literal)
>> Tom
>>> > Skos:prefLabel is a sub-property of rdfs:label, and the
>>> > rdfs:range of rdfs:label is rdfs:Literal [2] -- but that only
>>> > applies to the label properties, not to the skosxl:Label
>>> > class itself.  I don't see any obvious arguments against
>>> > coining a convention to the effect that the property chain
>>> > "ex:soundLabel, ex:soundForm" expresses the "sonic label"
>>> > of a SKOS concept, with skosxl:Label as the rdfs:range of
>>> > ex:soundLabel. Or something to that effect...
>> --
>> 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

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 22:12:18 UTC

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