Re: VIAF contributor model

I am for this approach as well.  I think Antoine's following discussion is relevant.
What I care about is to use skosxl for labels (preferred, alternative, hidden, etc) and not skos for labels.  I hope Jeff get this taken care. (In the discussion list sometimes this is not clearly stated.)
We had discussed issues of a person or corporate body as an author or as a subject of a work when FRSAD was developed.   Usually it is the relationships between a person/corporate body and a work that differentiate their roles.
And, VIAF contains the names for both real and spiritual.

Marcia


On 10/29/10 11:46 AM, "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:

Hi Jeff,

On that specific one:


> I'm also pretty convinced that the http://viaf.org/ontology/1.1/#Heading class needs to be bound to skosxl:Label class in some way (rdfs:subClassOf?). I don't think it can completely go away, though, because of inconvenient restrictions on the skosxsl:prefLabel and skosxl:altLabel.


I guess it would be possible to have viaf:Heading rdfs:subClassOf skosxl:Label, yes.
The issue then is the practical value of such a thing to which (SKOS) entity should these label be attached? skosxl:Label are nice per se, but linking them to something using skosxl:prefLabel/altLabel/hiddenLabel makes them much more interesting.
http://viaf.org/viaf/102333412 is not a skos:Concept, and I guess it shouldn't be--your decision to have http://viaf.org/viaf/102333412/#skos:Concept linked to it makes this even clearer. So you would attach these xl:Labels to http://viaf.org/viaf/102333412/#skos:Concept ? I guess that can be fine, I don't see any restrictions in SKOS-XL [1] that would prevent it, in fact.

Cheers,

Antoine

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/skos-xl.html