- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 20:57:34 +0100
- To: "gordon@gordondunsire.com" <gordon@gordondunsire.com>
- Cc: public-lld@w3.org
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 8:15 PM, gordon@gordondunsire.com <gordon@gordondunsire.com> wrote: > 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. > Is the distinction one concerning the 'things in the world', or more about their actual descriptions in some particular record? The 'identified by a particular name' bit sounds like a constraint on a description. Although you might imagine some peculiar group who managed to act as a unit without having any consistent collective name (and therefore no name that could be used in a record), that's perhaps an unintended corner case. The emphasis here seems not to be in that direction - but rather on names that exist but are not mentioned in the right description. Is that a fair reading? If so I'd call this a single class, and express the rule about names as [something like] an application profile. cheers, Dan
Received on Sunday, 31 October 2010 19:58:09 UTC