- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:49:29 -0700
- To: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- CC: public-schemabibex@w3.org
On 3/27/13 4:34 PM, Niklas Lindström wrote: > I'd like to add: > > 10. embodies / embodiedBy Just for the record, FRBR uses: Expression -> realizes -> Work Manifestation -> embodies -> Expression That's not a vote for or against, just for information. kc > > , representing levels of concretization/abstraction (and hence not > being symmetric properties). I say "levels" since I think it's ok to > use it to describe "partial embodiment", such as an "expression" of a > "work", although it's probably most apt for describing a simpler > abstract/concrete relation (like "instanceOf" in BibFrame). > > Like Karen I prefer simple property names to the "has ..." form in > general. In schema.org, there is only one such form right now > (schema:hasPOS), and a bunch of properties as simple verbs in s-form > (noticeably schema:mentions, which has a domain of > schema:CreativeWork). I don't know if there is a convention in > schema.org on inverses (no property is described with owl:inverseOf, > so it's hard to be sure), but there are three properties ending in > "By" (schema:affectedBy, schema:musicBy and schema:reviewedBy). > > In order to not expand the list of choices too much, how about folding > 8 and 9 into 1 and 3 respectively, and vote on the form separately? > (Thus meaning that the alternate form of 2 is "concretizes", 4 is > "expresses" and so on.) > > (Also, I agree with Jeff that avoiding superfluous inverses is a good > thing, at least in principle. I fear that the world of markup-embedded > metadata may call for more dirty approaches though, and it seems to be > a trend to sprinkle a little of everything into the mix without much > notion of "primary data" nor expectations on consumption (including > collation and bidirectional statement traversal). We'll see how > various guidelines develop over time.) > > Cheers, > Niklas > > (PS. Once we're settling on something, it's probably wise to declare > what (if any) relations that suggestion has to DC (e.g. hasFormat), > BibFrame (instanceOf) and particular properties in the various FRBR > vocabularies actively used in the wild (including metalex). And > perhaps what we come up with here will also influence the ongoing > development of BibFrame.) > > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >> I do think oneOf should be on the list. Also, I'm not fond of the "has..." >> form of property names. I prefer something that sounds more like a >> relationship than "has a thing" - So I"d add: >> >> 8. instantiates >> 9. realizes >> >> I think that the inverse relationships imply that the relationship be >> directional, whereas without the inverse the relationship is more open. In >> fact, >> >> A -> oneOf -> B >> B -> oneOf -> A >> >> makes perfect sense to me. >> >> Not all of the terms (hasInstance, hasConcretization) can be used in this >> way, which is why I don't suggest a non-inverse form for each of them. >> However, we are back to the difference between Work/Instance and >> "commonEndeavor" (for which Jeff's 'oneOf' would be an interesting >> substitute). >> >> kc >> >> >> >> >> On 3/27/13 1:04 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote: >>> >>> At the risk of distracting people from my favorite, I would re-offer: >>> >>> oneOf >>> >>> without an inverse property. There are plenty of properties in >>> Schema.org that don't have an inverse, so this shouldn't be unusual to >>> them. >>> >>> Jeff >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Wallis,Richard [mailto:Richard.Wallis@oclc.org] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 3:58 PM >>>> To: public-schemabibex@w3.org >>>> Subject: Candidates for the CreativeWork property names vote off >>>> >>>> Following Antoine's suggestion and little consensus as to the names >>> >>> for >>>> >>>> the CreativeWork properties currently documented as hasInstance & >>>> isInstanceOf - I am preparing to have a vote on it. >>>> >>>> So this is the first part of the process - assembling the candidates. >>>> >>>> Here is a few of what I remember having seen and heard in threads and >>>> discussions - please add others I have missed or that you think of >>> >>> over >>>> >>>> the next few days. I will close the candidate list on 31st March. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. hasInstance/instanceOf >>>> 2. hasConcretization/concretizationOf >>>> 3. hasRealization/relaisationOf >>>> 4. hasExpression/expressionOf >>>> 5. hasExample/exampleOf >>>> 6. hasDerivative/derivativeOf >>>> >>>> ~Richard >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Karen Coyle >> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >> ph: 1-510-540-7596 >> m: 1-510-435-8234 >> skype: kcoylenet >> > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 23:49:58 UTC