W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > April 2011

RE: Planned changes to the VIAF RDF

From: <gordon@gordondunsire.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:23:07 +0100 (BST)
To: Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, public-lld@w3.org, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Message-ID: <33300220.283665.1302693788024.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxltgw04.schlund.de>
Simon and others:
Ah, I'd forgotten about subjects ...
Jesus Christ doesn't need birth or death dates in an authority context, unless
there is another person/persona with the same name of interest
bibliographically; the dates are added to create distinguishable labels
(headings). If that was required, I guess both dates would need question-marks
to indicate uncertainty (O?-32?) - perhaps a (less frivolous) cataloguer can
correct me.
FRAD has an "is member of" relationship between a Person and a Corporate Body.
But I don't think it's appropriate for the Nicholas Bourbaki scenario ...

On 13 April 2011 at 11:59 Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com> wrote:

> I would take intention (t) in the technical sense of being about [the entity
> being referred to by the bibliographer]. That also covers the use of names as
> subjects.
> In fact, if the association had been written about, there might be an
> authority entry for them. Most of the VIAF files have name entries for "Jesus
> Christ", despite his lack of publications (the entries lack birth and death
> dates too).
> Another good example is "Grant Naylor", who are the authors of Red Dwarf, who
> have a personal name record, and who also have individual personal name
> records.
> From an ontological point of view, there are other kinds of things that we
> need to consider; organizations, which have an entity separate from the
> individuals who compose it vs. groups, whose identity is defined solely by
> their membership. I believe that foaf handles this already?
> I don't have FRSAD and FRAD in front of me; I don't think FRSAD makes a
> difference here though.
> Simon
> On Apr 13, 2011 6:27 AM, "gordon@gordondunsire.com
> [mailto:gordon@gordondunsire.com] " <gordon@gordondunsire.com
> [mailto:gordon@gordondunsire.com] > wrote:
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2011 11:23:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:19:02 UTC