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

Re: is FRBR relevant?

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 15:26:36 +0200
Message-ID: <4C66998C.5020605@few.vu.nl>
To: public-xg-lld@w3.org
On 8/13/10 4:25 PM, Jon Phipps wrote:
> *From:* public-xg-lld-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-xg-lld-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Emmanuelle Bermes
> *Sent:* Friday, August 13, 2010 5:07 AM
> *To:* Karen Coyle
> *Cc:* public-xg-lld@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: is FRBR relevant?
>
> 
>
>
> Wouldn't it be useful if the group could
> - provide a specific use case for subject search (which was the
> beginning of this thread)
> - identify the terminology gaps between library world and SemWeb world
> (I think that this work on terminology is something that we hadn't
> identified per se, but I'm currently at IFLA and I hear a lot about
> records, metadata, elements and sub-elements, properties, concepts,
> ontologies, etc. all used in a very mixed up and not precise way... )
>
> +1
>


Agreed to both!
I guess subject search will naturally appear in the use cases. There were already quite a few of them in the SKOS uses cases [1], which are very close to library concerns.

Antoine

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-ucr/
Received on Saturday, 14 August 2010 13:27:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 14 August 2010 13:27:12 GMT