- 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