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

Antw: Re: Citation Cluster

From: Adrian Pohl <pohl@hbz-nrw.de>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:51:04 +0100
Message-Id: <4D022238020000140003C005@agrippa.hbz-nrw.de>
To: "Kai Eckert" <kai@informatik.uni-mannheim.de>, "Barbara Tillett" <btil@loc.gov>
Cc: "public-lld@w3.org" <public-lld@w3.org>, "public-xg-lld" <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Hi Kai,

this looks really good. Now I'm beginning to understand where you are
going.

> BIBLIOGRAPHIC RESOURCE: A book, paper, article, ... publication
> REFERENCE: An entry in the bibliography / references of a
BIBLIOGRAPHIC 
> RESOURCE
> CITATION: A citation within the text, for example when a direct 
> quotation is made, linked to a REFERENCE.

Thanks for this much needed clarification.

> As I understand the current discussion, the question is, if the 
> REFERENCE as an own class is needed, or if we can just represent it
as a 
> Bibliographic Resource, i.e. directly link the cited resource. I
think 
> we need it to organize the citations in a bibliographic resource.
> 
> Another question might be, if we want to repeat the bibliographic 
> information for the reference, if we can directly link the
bibliographic 
> resource that is identified by the reference. One reason might be the

> desire to represent the actual information that is found in the 
> reference list. Of course we could always introduce a Bibliographic 
> Resource and add the information there. In this case, at a later
point 
> in time a mapping by owl:sameAs could take place. But then it would
be 
> at least difficult to regain the information that was found
originally 
> in the bibliography.

These questions seem to be related. I think this depends on the use
case. If you want to model "legacy references" in RDF you probably
should identify references as is done in your illustration so you can
associate them with the original string. This comes handy when you have
to compare two references which are different strings but might identify
the same resource and could possibly be linked. In future scholarly
texts, though, this shouldn't be necessary at all because linking should
exclusively happen by using URIs and not strings.
So - to understand what this is all about - what is the use case you
are discussing? Is it about digitizing works, doing OCR and parsing
citations and references to triplify them and link them to bibliographic
entries in library services etc.? Or is it about creating research
production tools where links to other resources can be establuished
easily? As you are talking about books and pages in the visualization
you are probably talking about the first use case. Thus, in my opinion,
you should model a bibliographic reference as an own class and associate
with it the actual string from the respective bibliography.

> Another question might be, if we want to repeat the bibliographic 
> information for the reference, if we can directly link the
bibliographic 
> resource that is identified by the reference. 

I think if "we can directly link the bibliographic resource that is
identified by the reference" means: We have a URI (DOI, URN etc.) for
this resource, then we probably can discard the bibliographic
information. (On the other side Ben wrote about "dois that point to the
wrong article" which would justify keeping the actual reference string.)
If it means: we can link to a bibliographic resource only based on the
provided string then we should keep the string.

One thing that doesn't seem right to me in the visualization: the
dc:creator-relation "Bell, Stewart" is associated with the reference. If
a creator is associated with the reference it shouldn't be the creator
of the referenced work but the creator of the referencing work (in this
case: Bibliographic Resource :book1).

Cheers
Adrian


 >>>Kai Eckert <kai@informatik.uni-mannheim.de> schrieb am Freitag, 10.
Dezember
2010 um 12:01:
> I created an illustration that hopefully sheds some light on the
model 
> that we so far had in mind. It is linked in the cluster document [1],

> here is the direct link.
> 
> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/14362931/lld/citation.png 
> 
> I thought about the proper naming of the involved classes and now
have 
> the following three:
> 
> BIBLIOGRAPHIC RESOURCE: A book, paper, article, ... publication
> REFERENCE: An entry in the bibliography / references of a
BIBLIOGRAPHIC 
> RESOURCE
> CITATION: A citation within the text, for example when a direct 
> quotation is made, linked to a REFERENCE.
> 
> As I understand the current discussion, the question is, if the 
> REFERENCE as an own class is needed, or if we can just represent it
as a 
> Bibliographic Resource, i.e. directly link the cited resource. I
think 
> we need it to organize the citations in a bibliographic resource.
> 
> Another question might be, if we want to repeat the bibliographic 
> information for the reference, if we can directly link the
bibliographic 
> resource that is identified by the reference. One reason might be the

> desire to represent the actual information that is found in the 
> reference list. Of course we could always introduce a Bibliographic 
> Resource and add the information there. In this case, at a later
point 
> in time a mapping by owl:sameAs could take place. But then it would
be 
> at least difficult to regain the information that was found
originally 
> in the bibliography.
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Kai
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Cluster_Citations 
> 
> Am 09.12.2010 13:51, schrieb Tillett, Barbara:
>> Why is "citation" not just an application of using bibliographic
data that 
> identifies a bibliographic entity?  Isn't the bibliographic data part

> (separate from the relationship information connecting the cited work
and the 
> citing work) the same as in a bibliographic record (granted less)? -
Barbara
>>
>> Barbara B. Tillett, Ph.D.
>> Chief, Policy&  Standards Division
>> Library of Congress
>> 101 Independence Ave., SE
>> Washington, D.C. 20540-4260
>> U.S.A.
>> tel: +1 (202) 707-4714
>> fax: +1 (202) 707-6629
>> email: btil@loc.gov 
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-lld-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of 
> Kai Eckert
>> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 3:02 AM
>> To: public-xg-lld; public-lld@w3.org 
>> Subject: Citation Cluster
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Ed, Peter and I further worked on the curation of the citation
cluster and 
> as promised (ACTION delivered), I now created a wiki page:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Cluster_Citations 
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Kai
>> --
>> =============================================
>> Kai Eckert
>> KR&  KM Research Group
>> Universit├Ąt Mannheim
>> B6, 23-29; Building B; Room B 1.15
>> D-68159 Mannheim
>> Tel.:  +49 621 181 2332
>> Fax:   +49 621 181 2682
>> WWW:   http://ki.informatik.uni-mannheim.de 
>> ---------------------------------------------
>>
>>
Received on Friday, 10 December 2010 11:51:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 10 December 2010 11:51:56 GMT