- From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:12:28 +0100
- To: "Pete Johnston" <p.johnston@UKOLN.AC.UK>, <DC-RDF-TASKFORCE@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
- Cc: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi Pete,
> Without taking a position one way or the other ;-) I'd just note that
> "pattern 2" is embedded in the DCAM
>
> http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/
>
> > Each resource may be a member of one or more classes. Note
> that where
> the resource is a value, the class is referred to as a vocabulary
> encoding scheme.
>
> so it's not just the mapping to RDF which would have to change.
>
Yup :)
> Also I don't think that the examples of "pattern 1" in the
> draft DCQ-RDF
> doc ever say that the object of the rdfs:isDefinedBy triple is the URI
> of the scheme.
>
> Section 2.3.2 suggests that "URI1" in that example is _not_ the URI of
> the scheme: the URI of the Class is the URI of the scheme
> ("If there is
> some RDF Class given to identify the Scheme....").
Quoting from [1] section 2.3 ...
'In the case where there is a URI, specifying the object we want to use in it's relation with the scheme, we could make an rdfs:isDefinedBy arc pointing to that URI. Such a triple of RDF(S) properties hanging off a resource is what one may call: Poor Man's Structured Values'
?
Oh, another thought, the only way I can see 'Vocabulary Encoding Scheme' mapping to RDF as is, without changing the AM, is to model them as RDF datatypes. I.e.:
<http://www.example.com/somedoc> dc:subject 'D08.586.682.075.400'^^dcterms:MESH.
Although I certainly can't claim to understand the finer points of how an RDF datatype maps a set of literal values to resources, the notion of a datatype in RDF seems to fit best with the notion of 'encoding' as it is described in the DCMI AM.
Would it be possible to allow both e.g. ...
<http://www.example.com/somedoc> dc:subject 'D08.586.682.075.400'^^dcterms:MESH.
... and e.g. ...
<http://www.example.com/somedoc> dc:subject <http://purl.org/dc/terms/MESH/D08.586.682.075.400>.
... where there is also ...
<http://purl.org/dc/terms/MESH/D08.586.682.075.400>
rdfs:label 'Formate Dehydrogenases';
rdf:value 'D08.586.682.075.400';
rdfs:isDefinedBy dcterms:MESH;
.
... to live side-by-side? In this case, the last bit of RDF could be used to define the literal-to-resource mapping via the rdf:value (or some other) property? And it would seem reasonable to then also state things like...
<http://purl.org/dc/terms/MESH/D08.586.682.075.400>
a skos:Concept;
skos:prefLabel 'Formate Dehydrogenases';
skos:altLabel 'Formate Hydrogenlyases';
skos:altLabel 'NAD-Formate Dehydrogenase';
skos:scopeNote 'Flavoproteins that catalyze reversibly the reduction of carbon dioxide to formate. Many compounds can act as acceptors, but...';
skos:historyNote '91(80); was see under ALDEHYDE OXIDOREDUCTASES 1980-90';
skos:broader <http://purl.org/dc/terms/MESH/D08.811.682.075>;
.
...?
Also, the pattern:
<http://www.example.com/somedoc> dc:subject 'D08.586.682.075.400'^^dcterms:MESH.
... seems to also match closely the XML encoding of qualified DC, using xsi:type.
That's all I have for now, cheers,
Al.
[1] http://dublincore.org/documents/2002/05/15/dcq-rdf-xml/
>
> Pete
>
Received on Monday, 10 October 2005 16:14:06 UTC