- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:05:29 +0200
- To: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <64FA9FF0-DD13-44B4-B716-C6F042B01B16@w3.org>
I am not sure all of you read the RDF Comment mailing list, so, to be on the safe side, I forward this mail... Ivan Begin forwarded message: > Resent-From: public-rdf-comments@w3.org > From: Thomas Baker <tom@tombaker.org> > Subject: Use Case: "Expressing FRBR Descriptions using Named Graphs" > Date: April 4, 2012 23:44:38 GMT+02:00 > To: public-rdf-comments@w3.org > Cc: Ron Murray <kandroma1@me.com>, Barbara Tillett <btil@loc.gov>, Gordon Dunsire <gordon@gordondunsire.com> > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20120404214438.GA47236@julius> > List-Id: <public-rdf-comments.w3.org> > > Dear Members of the RDF Working Group, > > The following text describes a proposed use case for Named Graphs. For anyone > unfamiliar with "FRBR," the Wikipedia page provides a quick overview [1]. FRBR > is the foundation for RDA (Resource Description and Access), the new cataloging > standard towards which major libraries are moving [2]. > > This proposal for conceptualizing FRBR entities as Named Graphs is based on > work by Ronald Murray and Barbara Tillett of the Library of Congress. These > ideas are illustrated in a visually very engaging slide deck, "From Moby-Dick > to Mash-Ups: Thinking About Bibliographic Networks" [3]. Gordon Dunsire has > also contributed to the proposal. > > We would be especially grateful for feedback in advance of an event on 27 April > at the British Library [4]. The event will mark the fifth anniversary of a > meeting in May 2007 which resulted in a recommendation that RDA and FRBR be > expressed in RDF [5]. > > The Named Graph approach outlined below is a relatively new contribution to > this ongoing thread. As the approach depends on the resolution of issues still > under discussion in the RDF Working Group, we would much appreciate your > comments or suggestions. > > Tom > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_Requirements_for_Bibliographic_Records > [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_and_Access > [3] http://www.slideshare.net/RonMurray/from-mobydick-to-mashups > [4] http://dcevents.dublincore.org/index.php/BibData/fyo > [5] http://www.bl.uk/bibliographic/meeting.html > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Expressing FRBR Descriptions using Named Graphs: a proposal > > W3C's Resource Description Framework (RDF) Working Group [1] is currently > discussing proposals for supporting "named graphs" to meet a wide range of use > cases [2], possibly by extending the TriG Named Graph and RDF Data Language > [3,4]. This proposal outlines how Named Graphs might be used in resource > descriptions that are based on the so-called WEMI entities (Work, Expression, > Manifestation, and Item) of the IFLA model Functional Requirements for > Bibliographic Records (FRBR) [5]. > > This proposal views descriptions of WEMI entities as bundles of statements made > at different levels of abstraction, from the most concrete Item level to the > most abstract Work level. Multi-level WEMI descriptions specify the > characteristics that any given Item shares with other Items at the level of > Work, Expression, and Manifestation. Ideally, it would be possible to > incorporate descriptions of resources at the Work, Expression, and > Manifestation levels, maintained in a distributed manner by various > institutions, into the local descriptions of particular Items. > > Consider the following four Named Graphs, each of which is identified with a > URI (A, B, C, or D) and contains two statements: > > -- Named Graph D, a Work-level description > P has_title "Moby-Dick, or, the Whale" > P has_as_subject "Whaling Ships -- Fiction" > > -- Named Graph C, an Expression-level description > Q has_language "English" > Q has_extent "213711 words" > > -- Named Graph B, a Manifestation-level description > R has_edition_issue "First Edition" > R has_pub_place "New York NY" > > -- Named Graph A, an Item-level description > X has_OAI_ID http://hdl.handle.net/10150/16470 > X has_condition "yellowing at page edges" > > One might bind these four chunks into a single description by "including" them > into a common "frame": > > FrameL includes NamedGraphA > FrameL includes NamedGraphB > FrameL includes NamedGraphC > FrameL includes NamedGraphD > > One would then want to infer that the Item in hand (described by the statements > in Named Graph A) is _also_ described by statements in the Named Graphs at the > more abstract levels of Work, Expression, and Manifestation included in the > same Frame. In other words, if X is the URI of the Item in hand, one would > like to infer: > > X has_title "Moby-Dick, or, the Whale" > X has_as_subject "Whaling Ships -- Fiction" > X has_language "English" > X has_extent "213711 words" > X has_edition_issue "First Edition" > X has_pub_place "New York NY > X has_OAI_ID http://hdl.handle.net/10150/16470 > X has_condition "yellowing at page edges" > > Discussion > > 1. Formal notions of Frame, and of "inclusion" in a Frame, would need to be > defined for the general case. > > 2. Formal rules would be needed for interpreting Frames with different > sets of FRBR descriptions, e.g., for the simple case above, in which > statements from Work-, Expression-, and Manifestation-level descriptions are > interpreted as applying to the Item. > > 3. Given the complex, even chaotic nature of the Web, flexibility to > implement this approach in a partial manner is a critical design criterion. > Particular WEMI descriptions should be useful in a Linked Data environment > independently of particular Frames and, ideally, even in the absence of an > understanding of Frames and Inclusion (see 1 above) or of the particular > rules applicable to FRBR (see 2 above). In the example described above, the > statements in Named Graph D about Work P would be useful independently of > FrameL, which (according to rules yet to be defined) would merely apply > those statements, additionally, to Item X. > > References > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/ > [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Why_Graphs > [3] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/trig/index.html# > [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Mar/0123.html > [5] http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.htm > > -- > Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org> > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2012 13:03:57 UTC