- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 23:01:16 -0500
- To: "Ross Singer" <ross.singer@talis.com>, "Tillett, Barbara" <btil@loc.gov>
- Cc: "public-lld" <public-lld@w3.org>
Ross is right that two resources are being modeled. (And more as he notes.) I didn't knowingly create these with the intention of separating author/subject use cases, though. (My intentions were a mystery even to me at the time.) In hindsight, my feeling is that the useful difference is that the skos:Concept is (explicitly or implicitly) bound to an identified "scheme" (skos:inScheme) whereas a foaf:Person simply "is". Clients can choose the perspective they like while others can use foaf:focus to reconcile them. (It would be nice if foaf:focus had an owl:inverseOf to give parity to these perspectives.) I suspect that "authority control" is a soon-to-be-anachronistic form of "skos:inScheme". Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: rxs@talisplatform.com [mailto:rxs@talisplatform.com] On Behalf Of > Ross Singer > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 5:33 PM > To: Tillett, Barbara > Cc: Young,Jeff (OR); public-lld > Subject: Re: VIAF contributor model > > There are two resources modeled: > > http://viaf.org/viaf/111894442/#skos:Concept > > and > > http://viaf.org/viaf/111894442/#foaf:Person > > (well, obviously there are more than that minted at: > http://viaf.org/viaf/111894442/rdf.xml) > > the first would appropriate for biographies of Bob Dylan, etc. the > latter for works by him. > > -Ross. > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Tillett, Barbara <btil@loc.gov> wrote: > > I still remain concerned that by using SKOS for names of persons and > > corporate bodies, there is either an explicit or implied "is the > subject > > of" relationship going on for the person/corporate body being > described > > with respect to some work. Am I wrong? - Barbara Tillett > > > > > > > > From: public-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-lld-request@w3.org] On > Behalf > > Of Young,Jeff (OR) > > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 5:05 PM > > To: public-lld > > Subject: RE: VIAF contributor model > > > > > > > > Thanks for all the feedback. Sorry for my lag following up. > > > > > > > > VIAF still needs to deliver more substance to fulfill its potential, > but the > > next release should improve interoperability while adding support for > > foaf:Organization/rdaEnt:CorporateBody. Mockups of Jane Austen and > Die > > deutsche Nationalbibliothek are attached. > > > > > > > > As suggested back at the start of this thread, SKOS will play a core > > infrastructure role in the next release. Each contributor will be > modeled as > > a skos:ConceptScheme and every contributed record will be modeled as > a > > skos:Concept in the contributor's scheme. The contributed concept > URIs > > coined by VIAF will be based on the contributor's "record" ID and > will > > behave by redirecting to the VIAF cluster to which it is matched > (which > > could change over time). > > > > > > > > Here is a test system URI for a contributed SELIBR record (207420) to > > demonstrate: > > > > > > > > http://test.viaf.org/viaf/sourceID/SELIBR|207420#skos:Concept > > > > > > > > Tangent: IMO, Library Linked Data authority systems in the future > SHOULD be > > based on skos:ConceptScheme/skos:Concept and we're starting to see > this with > > LCSH and SELIBR. I suspect that ANY skos:ConceptScheme could > potentially be > > viewed as an "authority system" and clients should be able to use > them as > > such without assuming any architecture or domain model dependencies. > > > > > > > > For VIAF contributors that choose to follow the SKOS model in their > own > > domains, VIAF should map to their URIs using owl:sameAs. You can > observe > > this in the attached example for Jane Austen involving SELIBR: > > > > > > > > <http://viaf.org/viaf/sourceID/SELIBR%7C207420#skos:Concept> > > > > skos:inScheme <http://viaf.org/authorityScheme/SELIBR> ; > > > > owl:sameAs <http://libris.kb.se/resource/auth/207420#concept> . > > > > > > > > I suspect there will be some concern that VIAF is coining "alias" > URIs, but > > I would argue that intentional HTTP URI aliases play a *functional > role* in > > Linked Data by decentralizing information *about* the thing. SELIBR > can > > deliver its information about "the thing" from its URI and VIAF can > deliver > > more (especially linking) information from its URI. The information > may come > > from different perspectives and yet the players mutually agree it's > the same > > "real world" thing they're describing. > > > > > > > > The solution for the http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#S14 > integrity > > constraint for skos:prefLabel on "clusters" is still unclear to me > and thus > > won't be addressed in the next release. (Sorry.) The custom > properties > > viaf:hasEstablishedForm and viaf:hasXRefAlternate properties will > continue > > to be used for now although the use cases for them are unclear. > > > > > > > > Nevertheless, I want to align the VIAF ontology with SKOS/SKOSXL > wherever > > possible and so the viaf:Heading class will be upgraded to > skosxl:Label in > > the ontology like so: > > > > > > > > viaf:Heading rdfs:subClassOf skosxl:Label . > > > > > > > > In deference to FRSAD, the next release of VIAF will continue to > treat > > labels (i.e. viaf:Headings) as 1st class identifiable resources at > the > > expense of using plain literals. Without practical use cases, I'm > > uncomfortable with this choice. > > > > > > > > Jeff > > > > ________________________________ > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > > Find out more about Talis at http://www.talis.com/ > > shared innovation(tm) > > > > Any views or personal opinions expressed within this email may not be > those > > of Talis Information Ltd or its employees. The content of this email > message > > and any files that may be attached are confidential, and for the > usage of > > the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient, > then > > please return this message to the sender and delete it. Any use of > this > > e-mail by an unauthorised recipient is prohibited. > > > > Talis Information Ltd is a member of the Talis Group of companies and > is > > registered in England No 3638278 with its registered office at > Knights > > Court, Solihull Parkway, Birmingham Business Park, B37 7YB. > >
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2010 04:02:09 UTC