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

Re: [open-bibliography] Draft development vocabulary for bibliographic metadata

From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:47:58 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTil20_qfQLkWsnDwjeU1XbISCP5DeOM1lDb8nGHJ@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Hello all

2010/6/16 Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>

Is there any reason why you coined new classes/properties instead of reusing
> and extending existing ones?

This is indeed a critical issue this group should address. A handful of
vocabularies have de facto began to act as the semantic glue of the Linked
Data Cloud.
FOAF, Dublin Core and SKOS are the first to come to mind. What is the
rationale for re-use or not dcterms properties such as creator, hasPart etc.
vs duplicate them in the frbr namespace.

> For example, it seems like you could coopt the Work and Manifestation
> classes from http://vocab.org/frbr/core and add the (useful!)
> hasManifestation property.

And what about connecting to the more naive class foaf:Document? For example
could the connection be made at the level of Work or Item etc.

In the Big Picture view of the Linked Data world, re-using is important for
the obvious reasons, avoiding re-inventing the wheel, making provision for
more interoperability and linking etc. But it's also important to provide
feedback to the source vocabularity community, along the lines of : hey
guys, look at how we reused your stuff, did we get it well, we are not quite
sure of the semantics of foo and bar, maybe you could explicit more etc. I
take as a social good practice in this regard the continuous and
constructive conversation between SKOS, Dublin Core and FOAF communities re.
alignment, refinement, linking of their respective vocbularies. I think
Antoine Tom and Dan are showing the way ahead, not only from technical, but
social viewpoint.

Bottom line : linked data means linked people, eager to share and build
community of knowledge.


PS : a question set yesterday on SKOS list [1] re. using DC partitive
relations to link skos concept schemes is still waiting for answers. Maybe
of interest to illustrate this debate.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2010Jun/0010.html

Bernard Vatant
Senior Consultant
Vocabulary & Data Engineering
Tel:       +33 (0) 971 488 459
Mail:     bernard.vatant@mondeca.com
3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France
Web:    http://www.mondeca.com
Blog:    http://mondeca.wordpress.com
Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2010 14:48:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:54 UTC