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:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  November 2015

BIBFRAME November 2015

Subject:

Re: Properties of Item proposal

From:

"Denenberg, Ray" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 17 Nov 2015 09:40:38 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

Thomas - I take your point about compete vs. incomplete description with respect to "RDF representation", but I'm not using it in that context, but rather in the context of: if you dereference a web resource, you get a representation of that resource; there may be many representations, one of which may be RDF. NOT to imply that that representation is complete.

Clearly there is confusion over "resource" - web resource, information resource, RDF resource. I'm not sure it's useful to sort through it all, as some of these definition have historical significance only. So let's try to break this down without talking about resources.

An RDF property may be a datatype property or an object property. A datatype property takes a literal for its object (Quotes). An object property takes an "individual" for its object (braces). "Individual" as in, a member of an RDF class. An individual always has an RDF description (or in your terminology, you can always make an RDF statement about it).

Do you agree?

Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Thomas Berger
> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 4:08 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Properties of Item proposal
>
> Am 16.11.2015 um 22:14 schrieb Denenberg, Ray:
> > Karen, take this one step at a time. Suppose I have a triple:
> >
> > <some subject> bf:someProperty <http://someURI>
> >
> > Where again I am using turtle notation and I am explicitly enclosing
> > http://someURI in angle braces. I claim that http://someURI
> > (enclosed in angle braces) must be dereferenceable as RDF (meaning
> > that there is an RDF representation of that resource, http://someURI,
> > which may be one of many representations, and I can get that RDF
> > representation by doing a get on it requesting RDF via content
> > negotiation).
>
> No. You may be alluding to the concept of "information resources" when
> distinctions between Real World Object and Web Content describing them
> comes into play. But these may be anything and are not restricted to RDF.
>
> I would say, already thinking in lines of "an RDF representation of that
> resource" is alien to RDF: Having <http://someURI> in object position of a
> statement implies that there is an entity which can be identified by that IRI.
> So somewhere in the world there may exists statemtents with
> <http://someURI> in subject position, or there may not. That the sum of
> these statements yields a (complete?) description of that entity or even that
> there is (at least) some single place where a description in the sense of
> several RDF triples for that IRI exist, is not implied. If so, we would have the
> case of an information resource again, but stating that there is an associated
> information resource on the web for <http://someURI> would mandate the
> coining of a different IRI since at that point we have to differentiate between
> the resource and its description as another resource. There is a standard
> practice with fragment identifiers to achieve that without effort.
>
> The hassle with IRIs (<bracketed>, as identifiers in RDF context) against URIs
> as strings in "quotes" is based on our attempts to encompass the concept of
> "Real World Identifiers" (a notion probably originally koyned here): Since we
> are expecting to "see" that https://viaf.org/viaf/174144647695570462777/
> "is" a VIAF identifier (or a canonical URI for the VIAF identifier
> "174144647695570462777" or an alternative representation for the abstract
> VIAF identifier of VIAF identifier datatype behind that) or that "urn:isbn:0-
> 486-27557-4" refers to a resource which also will be unanimously identified
> by the ISBN 0-486-27557-4. For that we need /inspection/ of the URIs and
> that is due to opaqueness not possible for the bracketed Identifiers in the
> RDF sense.
>
> viele Gruesse
> Thomas Berger

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

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