- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:14:19 -0700
- To: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Cc: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>, public-lld <public-lld@w3.org>
Of course, I forgot my link: http://kcoyle.blogspot.com/2010/05/frbr-and-sharability.html kc Quoting "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>: > The counter argument is that the dcterms:hasVersion/isVersionOf solution > isn't documented anywhere and other solutions are plausible. Without a > systematic connection, SPARQL connections between Work and Manifestation > become a guessing game. > > The question is, how much grief will the RDF designer get for wanting to > coin a new 303 URI? If the framework is flexible, then go ahead and have > them coin a 303 URI for Expression: > > http://example.org/expression/45678 a frbr:Expression . > > My suggestion of using a hash assumes that Expression will always be a > twin to Work and is easily piggybacked on it without fighting for > infrastructure support. If and when Expressions deserve 303 URIs, the > old hash URIs can migrate to the 303 URI using owl:sameAs. > > Jeff > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rxs@talisplatform.com [mailto:rxs@talisplatform.com] On Behalf > Of >> Ross Singer >> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 11:13 AM >> To: Young,Jeff (OR) >> Cc: Karen Coyle; public-lld >> Subject: Re: Non- and Partial-FRBR Metadata >> >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org> >> wrote: >> > Another solution would be to identify the expression as a hash on > the >> > work URI. For example: >> > >> > <http://example.org/work/12345> a frbr:Work . >> > <http://example.org/work/12345/#frbr:Expression> a frbr:Expression . >> > <http://example.org/manifestation/98765> a frbr:Manifestation . >> > >> >> This would work, sure. The only downside I see is that it would >> require reconciliation and maintenance should a real Expression >> eventually come along. >> >> Personally, I think sacrificing the purity of FRBR (via >> rda:workManifested, etc. with no Expression declared) would be a more >> desirable alternative than the potential costs associated with >> shimming in some Fauxpression just to meet the (unrealistic, frankly) >> requirements of a(n ivory tower-esque) data model. >> >> Honestly, does the internet break, do libraries spontaneously combust, >> does data turn into meaningless gibberish all because somebody left >> out an Expression resource? >> >> -Ross. > > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 2010 16:14:55 UTC