- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 18:16:24 -0800
- To: public-lld <public-lld@w3.org>
Sorry to go back to this, but I keep ruminating on it because there are things I haven't understood yet. In FRBRer each property is given a rdfs:domain designation of the FRBRer class to which it belongs. This follows what I read as the intent of the FRBR model, which is that it creates a bibliographic universe where each entity has a set of properties ("attributes" in the FRBR doc), and each property describes one and only one entity. Given this use of the rdfs:domain property, I'm not sure how much more constraint is added by the declaration of the classes being disjoint. In the context of FRBRer, it seems redundant. I can see where "disjoint" would affect the creation of properties, since it would mean that no property could have more than one FRBRer class as rdfs:domain, but since FRBRer is being defined by the FRBR group and only the FRBR group, any new properties being created will follow this "one-to-one" principle. I asked about examples of where this disjointedness would make a difference. Dan Brickley's answer[1] seems not to answer the question because it doesn't use FRBRer properties, but if it did, it would be the domain declaration on the property that is violated, not the disjointedness of the classes. No? RDA runs into a problem that might be a better example: it wants to create some data elements that can be used with any entity. These are mainly administrative data elements, such as cataloger's notes about the cataloging decisions made during the creation of the data. They are not properties that are defined in FRBR/FRBRer. If RDA creates these properties and does NOT constrain them to a FRBRer domain (perhaps leaving them domainless), would using these properties in statements describing FRBRer entities violate the "disjoint" constraint? I'll try to do an example: _xyz: a FRBRer:Work RDVocab:workTitle "Little Women" RDVocab:catNote "something something" _abc: a FRBRer:Expression RDVocab:languageOfExpression "English" FRBRer:isRealizationOf _xyz RDVocab:catNote "something about the expression" where: RDVocab:workTitle has rdfs:domain FRBRer:Work RDVocab:languageOfExpression has rdfs:domain FRBRer:Expression RDVocab:catNote has no rdfs:domain defined I believe that another way to pose this question is whether the use of rdfs:disjoint constrains extension of FRBRer by users of other namespaces. It seems that it would disallow defining a property as having more than one FRBRer rdfs:domain declaration, but does it have other implications as well? kc [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2011Nov/0006.html -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Saturday, 26 November 2011 02:16:56 UTC