Re: [open-bibliography] MARC Codes for Forms of Musical Composition

On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Houghton,Andrew <houghtoa@oclc.org> wrote:
> DBPedia is a poor example to use for common practice. It certainly
> is a large dataset, but only one dataset. Also, there has been
> numerous discussions on the SKOS list over the past year about
> DBPedia's describing resources with multiple rdf:type is not
> considered "good" practice.

For better or worse dbpedia is kind of the center of the center of the
Linked Data cloud. As Linked Data spreads I think we'll see this
change, and we already are I think with Freebase, Facebook, etc. So I
think Ross is right to look to it as an example of what the Linked
Data community is doing.

I don't know about its "goodness", but I've definitely seen resources
assigned multiple types. For example in Dean Allemang and Jim
Hendler's chapter on Asserted Triples Versus Inferred Triples in
Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist [1].

In principle I kinda agree with Andy that keeping it simple is often a
good place to start out -- and to only start making things complicated
with multiple types when you feel like you have to. I think it's
important to be clear about the resources you are identifying and
describing. But that doesn't preclude assigning multiple types to a
resource, if you think the resource can be seen in different
lights/contexts, and you want to help people do that.

It's a big web, so I imagine we'll see lots of different typing
practices, if Linked Data continues to spread.

//Ed

[1] http://bit.ly/9uJR23 (I ♥ GoogleBooks)

Received on Thursday, 8 July 2010 03:36:19 UTC