LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME Archives

BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  November 2014

BIBFRAME November 2014

Subject:

Re: Closed and Open Assumptions was [BIBFRAME] [Topic] Types

From:

Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 8 Nov 2014 09:37:04 +0900

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (36 lines)

On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 11:29:04AM -0500, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> The issue is not between CWA and OWA. It is whether or not an
> application consuming Bibframe triples will be able to operate
> correctly over them without using RDFS inferencing. It is not possible
> to "require" any given set of triples in the world, Bibframe aside, to
> have explicit typing, at least not in any currently widely-understood
> way. On the other hand, if it is not possible to interpret a set of
> Bibframe-using triples into a meaningful bibliographic universe
> without inferencing, then you _have_ required the presence of
> inferencing _in applications_. There is an enormous difference between
> requiring some condition on some set of triples (which is the interest
> of the groups you mention below) and requiring a particular capability
> from applications dealing with a particular kind of data, which is
> what this discussion was about.

I have no argument at all with this practical application requirement.
But again, if your data must meet certain requirements for the purposes
of applications, should this not be done in an application profile aka
"BIBFRAME profile" [1]?

For example, if you want type to be stated explicitly in your data, you
could formulate a Property Template for a rdf:type statement (e.g., as
per section 2.3 and the example in section 5.2).

The part I'm not getting is why this thread is discussing
application-specific requirements for structural constraints on data
without reference to BIBFRAME profiles, which are _all about_ specifying
structural constraints on data.

Tom

[1] http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/bibframe-profiles.html

-- 
Tom Baker <[log in to unmask]>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
July 2011
June 2011

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager