Re: frad:Person and foaf:Person

All:


fwiw, FRBRer defines Corporate Body as "An organization or group of individuals
and/or organizations acting as a unit." And FRAD defines Corporate Body as "An
organization or group of persons and/or organizations identified by a particular
name acting as a unit." The difference is that FRAD needs a name (person and
individual are synonymous in FRBRer and FRAD). The FRBR Review Group discussed
this at IFLA 2010, and concluded that the difference was significant. So
Corporate Body is a separate class in each of the FRBRer and FRAD namespaces,
and the FRAD class is a sub-class of the FRBRer class. It is likely that the
differences will be resolved in the consolidated FR model.
 
Cheers
 
Gordon

 

On 31 October 2010 at 14:58 Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
> > Thinking more about our attempt to reconcile frad:Person and foaf:Person, I
> > realize that I don't know how frad defines Person class in its model (and I
> > don't have access to the documentation other than the registered properties
> > in the metadata registry). From what I can glean from the frad terms in the
> > metadata registry, the frad classes and subclasses are:
> >
> > Bibliographic Entity
> >  - Person
> >  - Family
> >  - Corporate body
> > Name
> > Rules
> > Agency
> > Identifier
> > Controlled Access Point
> >
> > I don't see an obvious connection between, for example, the Person and the
> > Name or the Identifier. Does someone have a diagram they can contribute?
> > (Gordon, you may have sent me one at some time, but I seem to have lost it.
> > Sorry.)
> >
> > I'm trying to get my head around what the "join" would be between frad and
> > foaf; what would allow linking and what the link(s) would infer. And I must
> > admit that from the above, the fact that Person is a subclass of
> > Bibliographic Entity makes it somewhat puzzling to me.
>
> Can we read that as "Entity Potentially Or Actually Of Possible
> Interest Regarding Bibliographic Information", or something equally
> broad? Are there any illuminating counter-examples?
>
> If there are examples of people that are clearly, erm, people, yet
> also clearly fall outside this definition, then we have extra mapping
> headaches.
>
> Re 'Corporate body', perhaps FOAF's "Organization" class approximates
> this. Must a 'Corporate body' be incorporated formally in some
> jurisdiction (at some point at least), or can unincorporated
> associations also count here?
>
> eg.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_documents#Unincorporated_associations
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_association
> (these are the main kinds of legal entity supported by
> http://www.oneclickor.gs/ currently, btw)
>
> cheers,
>
> Dan
>