goals wrt FRBR/RDA (was Re: Works and instances)

On 7 Jan 2013, at 08:08, Gordon Dunsire wrote:
> Does this provide a way forward for schema.org to interoperate with FRBR/RDA?

Perhaps I'm being a bit pedantic, but I don't think I'd state this as a goal -- at least not directly. 

Rather, I'd ask: 
- What qualities of library and bibliographic data are needed for search engines to serve endusers?
- How does FRBR/RDA promote these qualities? What qualities of the data needs to be preserved?

To me, going back to use cases would really help. If anybody has time to translate the problems/solutions into specifics, with our use cases, I think that would bring us forward.

We currently have a number of use cases here:
http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Use_Cases
Among them are to describe a FRBR Item and a FRBR Manifestation:
1.4 Use case: Describe a FRBR Item (e.g. a single identifiable book)
1.5 Use case: Describe a FRBR Manifestation

Another way to ask my question, is if we use isbd:hasExpression and isbd:hasItem [1], does that address these problems? If so, then it's a way forward.

Gordon, if this sounds dense it's probably because I need more context on the ISBD Review Group's work--beyond ISBD identifiers they appear to have envisioned FRBR-ER identifiers which are news to me.

-Jodi

[1] 
isbd:hasExpression rdfs:label "has expression" ;
rdfs:domain isbd:C2001 ;
rdfs:range frbrer:C1002 .
frbrer:C1002 rdfs:label “Expression” .
 
isbd:hasItem rdfs:label "has item" ;
rdfs:domain isbd:C2001 ;
rdfs:range frbrer:C1004 .
frbrer:C1004 rdfs:label “Item” .

-Jodi