- From: Dawson, Laura <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 10:14:11 -0500
- To: Michael Hopwood <michael@editeur.org>, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- CC: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>, Web Schemas TF <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
Perhaps we're looking at a composite. On 2/19/13 8:32 AM, "Michael Hopwood" <michael@editeur.org> wrote: >Hmmm. I've followed this fascinating thread at a distance but I thought >it's a reasonable point to chime in; it's not so much the edge cases, >it's that in this context, everything is an edge case. > >In all the relevant ontologies and schemas I've dealt with, there simply >is no fundamental difference; for example, Sir John Falstaff has an ISNI, >although he's fictional; he's also a literary pseudonym of James White... > >The reason for this is that in data, you don't describe actual people >(maybe FOAF or VCARD are exceptions), you describe public identities. You >can only tell the real ones from the fictional from their relationships; >their properties are the same. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Dawson, Laura [mailto:Laura.Dawson@bowker.com] >Sent: 19 February 2013 12:50 >To: Martin Hepp >Cc: Thad Guidry; Richard Wallis; Web Schemas TF; Gregg Kellogg >Subject: Re: FictionalThing proposal added to Web Schemas wiki > >There are many edge cases, but I think there are enough straightforward >cases to warrant the attempt. >
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2013 15:14:54 UTC