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  August 2015

BIBFRAME August 2015

Subject:

Re: BIBFRAME Identifier, Role, and Authority Proposals

From:

Thomas Berger <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:00:30 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (56 lines)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am 26.08.2015 um 17:44 schrieb Steven Folsom:

> Re: the Identifiers proposal, Karen has said this before, but we
> shouldn’t conflate the role of URIs with string identifiers. When I re
ad
> the Authorities proposal, I interpret bf:identifiedBy as having the
> semantics:
> 
> <some thing> <is identified through an authority> <some authority reso
urce> .
> 
> **But** the identifier proposal says the bf:identifiedBy property is
> for an identifier string. That’s very different. I would recommend we 
be
> able to say the following through different properties:
> 
> <some bf:Resource> <is described by an authority> <some authority reso
urce> .
> <some authority resource> <is identified by an identifier> <some strin
g identifier> .

More and more I have the impression that a distinction between
authorities (I have to admit that I don't fully understand the
concept, there seems to be a cultural gap) and identifiers does
not make much sense.

If we just had a class bf:Identification (paralleling your previous
reasoning to turn bf:Contributor in bf:Contribution) then we
can interpret any authority control document as belonging to
that class. Combine that with the observeation that most authority
<s>control documents</s> records indeed contain a mention of their
string identifier as well as strings for authorized headings and
also express the RWO they describe as an URI we're probably done
(bf:Identification instances could fill the blanks, i.e.
noting the scheme the object belongs to: It seems that not all
RDF representations of authority records make this explicit).

viele Gruesse
Thomas Berger



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iJwEAQECAAYFAlXd8K0ACgkQYhMlmJ6W47NDxwP9E5Fmez74iehfuqcicYPXXa8b
VQT1sbp/0EG7ANS2eCkOq17mLofOMCmqCp919f5r2sIYEJxUG6Lsj02SeemubXTz
eGv9MeEUmvF8wAXBP/t3tPYwZWd8246NHumhtENLv77/uWWE96ux2JZO8WLrNtKO
KKHx5ICF95eJNZVQWL4=
=juBf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager