- From: Richard <listserve@richardlennox.net>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 15:39:43 +0100
- To: "Richard" <listserve@richardlennox.net>, Pete Johnston <p.johnston@ukoln.ac.uk>, 'Richard' <listserve@richardlennox.net>, 'www-rdf-interest' <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Apologies for the previous incomplete message!
>
>
> > I need to say in
> > > the simplest way possible that there is a list of contributors:
> > >
> > > 1 marcrel:aut #XYZ
> > > 2 marcrel:ill #ABC
> > >
> > > such that they point to a foaf:Person.
> >
> > OK, in that case, as bib:contributors and marcrel:(xyz) are both
> > properties of your resource of type bib:Citable, and it's the
> > contributors you wish to order, I think you'd need to use them as
> > distinct properties, something like bib.xml attached (which generates
> > the graph attached as bib.png).
>
>
> However this leads to the point of usability - Is an average user
> willing to spend the extra time creating the two sets of contributors
> both pointing to the same foaf:Persons - one defining the ordering and
> one defining the types? By not ordering the contributors, this
> information may be lost in particular where the ordering of the
> contributors infers the level of contribution.
>
> The ideal that I am striving for would be a combination of the two.
> With the type of contributor specified within the ordered list. While
> slightly more verbose this seems to do the trick:
> <rdf:RDF>
> <bib:Citable>
> <bib:Contributors rdf:parseType="Resource">
> <rdf:li rdf:parseType="Resource">
> <marcrel:aut rdf:resource="#Kamereddine" /></rdf:li>
> <rdf:li rdf:parseType="Resource">
<marcrel:aut rdf:resource="#Nederpelt" /></rdf:li>
>
> </bib:Contributors>
>
> </bib:Citable>
> </rdf:RDF
This appeard to be valid with the Validator but what are peoples
thoughts on it?
Cheers Richard
Received on Thursday, 3 June 2004 10:39:46 UTC