Re: AW: Recommendations: URIs

I still haven't got my head round the meaning of A-box and T-box so taking on trust assertions - but the way it is written here makes sense to me.

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com
Email: owen@ostephens.com
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 3 May 2011, at 09:17, Antoine Isaac wrote:

> On 4/28/11 11:51 AM, Svensson, Lars wrote:
>> Ed wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Thomas Baker<tbaker@tbaker.de>
>> wrote:
>>>> I think we're agreeing that "assigning URIs" is a key point
>>>> but that for the sake of readers we need to distinguish "URIs
>>>> for properties and classes" from "URIs for dataset items
>>>> (instances)".
>>> 
>>> Nicely put Tom. I second Jeff's recommendation to at least reference
>>> ABox and TBox to ground the more library friendly definitions wherever
>>> that may happen: glossary, etc.
>> 
>> Yes, and as I see it, the focus in "assigning URIs" should be on
>> "dataset items (instances)".
> 
> 
> Yes, we have to be careful not to let the technical terms bias the debate too much, or we'll end up with recommendations that make no sense to library people ;-)
> 
> Note that we can still mention the A-Box/T-Box aspect in our terminology effort [1], so that, as Jeff and Ed advocate, it can be "grounded" in more formal terms.
> I'd suggest (and volunteer) to adapt [1] so as to reflectthat:
> - "datasets" are A-boxes
> - "metadata element sets" are T-boxes,
> - "value vocabularies" can be considered as A-boxes most of the time (some value vocabularies may be represented as SKOS concepts and/or hierarchies of classes/properties, like MARC relators)
> 
> 
> Otherwise, I agree with saying that libraries with specific linked data projects should focus on datasets.
> 
> That being said, I would put in the recommendations that some libraries or library organizations should play a leading role organizing the metadata element set space. I don't think that it deviates much from the current organization, by the way--think of the Library of Congress. It's just about warning that the old roles still apply, even if the technology is changing.
> One change may be in the way this is done, though: libraries involved in element set work should probably work in a more cross-domain environments, as modelling is more about networking: universities, W3C, publishers, DCMI and other organizations are partners that come to mind...
> 
> Sorry to add another mail to that thread--I just hope it makes sense...
> 
> Antoine
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Library_terminology_informally_explained#Definitions
>

Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 10:00:26 UTC