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

RE: Open Library and RDF

From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:37:16 -0400
Message-ID: <52E301F960B30049ADEFBCCF1CCAEF590900A33A@OAEXCH4SERVER.oa.oclc.org>
To: "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Cc: <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Karen,

Excellent! I don't think there are many problems, but the fixes would
allow us to use these as Linked Data exemplars. Here is the link to one
of the Open Library resources to help illustrate my suggestions:

http://openlibrary.org/works/OL15168504W.rdf

<frbr:Work rdf:about="http://openlibrary.org/works/OL15168504W">

The URI in the rdf:about currently behaves by returning 200 (OK) for
Accept: application/rdf+xml or else 301 (Moved Permanently). I suggest
changing this behavior to conform to Linked Data r303uri
<http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/#r303uri>. In other words, change the RDF
negotiation behavior to do a 303 to
http://openlibrary.org/works/OL15168504W.rdf and change the 301 for HTML
to a 303. The same would hold true for the author URIs and any others
like it.

You should consider using frbrCore:creator in your frbrCore:Work rather
than (or at least in addition to) dcterms:creator:

<frbr:creator rdf:resource="http://openlibrary.org/authors/OC34266A" />

Since the range on frbrCore:creator is frbrCore:ResponsibleEntity,
though, you should consider the confusion created by the fact that
http://openlibrary.org/authors/OC34266A currently identifies a
foaf:Person. People don't seem to like my idea of keeping these typed
identities separate, so I will let them suggest solutions. Hopefully
they won't twist your arm to switch your XML from <frbr:Work...> to
<rdf:Description...>

I believe you should change rdf:value to rdfs:label in the following
snippet:

        <dcterms:creator>
          <rdf:Description
rdf:about="http://openlibrary.org/authors/OL34266A">
          <rdf:value>Aimee Bender</rdf:value> 
          </rdf:Description>
        </dcterms:creator>

This next point isn't your fault, but I wish the FRBR Core ontology had
paid the extra money and created properties according to the FRBR spec
like frbrCore:titleOfTheWork with a sensible domain and range rather
than deferring to dumbed-down DC elements.

On the "Author" side, I don't see how rdg2 properties can be justified
for foaf:Person since their rdfs:domain is
http://RDVocab.info/uri/schema/FRBRentitiesRDA/Person. If the assumption
is that using this property inferentially forces the individual to
become rdf:type <http://RDVocab.info/uri/schema/FRBRentitiesRDA/Person>,
my feeling is that we're encouraging a muddle. This also brings us back
to my complaint about conflating rdf:types for an individual.
 
Thanks for helping to present the Open Library information in this new
way. I hope it will open some eyes.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net] 
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 11:34 AM
To: Young,Jeff (OR)
Cc: public-xg-lld@w3.org
Subject: Re: Open Library and RDF

Quoting "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>:

>
> It's not very good RDF and it's not Linked Data, but they're on track.

Jeff, as the author of that RDF, I would love to hear how to make it  
better! There are limitations to what can be done using the OL  
templates (which is what drives the RDF output), but within those  
limitations I'm open to any changes.

We could discuss it here, or you can post your suggestions to  
ol-tech@archive.org.

Thanks,
kc

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Friday, 16 July 2010 17:38:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 16 July 2010 17:38:03 GMT