On 23/05/13 05:25, Trail, Nate wrote:
> I think when you start reusing existing properties, you're relying on
> them being around for the long haul, and requiring systems that consume
> them to be aware of all the multiple namespaces.
The "syntactic sugar" option used by madsrdf:hasCloseExternalAuthority
does not introduce a new namespace from the users' point of view. The
syntactic sugar can even be kept in a separate RDF file from the
definition of the bibframe properties, making it second class and
invisible to everyone who doesn't want it.
> In all cases, I can't
> see us (the library community) agreeing that the way foaf or dc (or
> whatever) uses a term really matches what we're talking about.
Following that arguement we should also walk away from ISO 639, ISO
3166, RFC 3986, Unicode and so forth. None of them are perfect from a
library point of view but all of the are better than rolling our own.
[For the record I'm not suggestion using dc / Dublincore.]
Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/