Karen, Thanks for the confirmation. Nate
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2015 11:28 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Blank nodes vs. resources (redux)
On 4/23/15 7:18 AM, Trail, Nate wrote:
> Bf:Title being flattened out may be a mistake; I think it should
> really just a blank node, too. I don’t much like blank nodes, but we
> need to group together the title properties. Is there a use-case for
> having all the bf:Works with the title “[Untitled] Photograph 1991.”
> point to a single resource someplace that returns you that string when
> you(r system) reference it?
Actually, I think that would be a mistake. Even though there are titles that are the same *string* they name a different thing. That would be like having a single identifier for everyone named Bill Jones. You would be identifying the string, not the resource whose title it is. Note that among published works there are ones with the same title -- but giving them the same identifier would imply that they are the same publication.
I see no advantage to giving identifiers to titles. I think it makes sense to leave titles as strings to be read by humans and searched via keyword. They are text for human consumption. If we want to identify resources, a title alone won't do.
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net