This is an example from the authorities document:
<Organization resource="http://bibframe/auth/org/k.g.saur">
<label>K.G. Saur</label>
<hasIDLink
resource="http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/nr91037301" />
<hasVIAFLink resource="http://viaf.org/viaf/125770969" />
<hasDNBLink resource="http://d-nb.info/gnd/4020140-5" />
</Organization>
First, I doubt if it's sustainable to create a separate property for
each authority file one might link to. Second, I question the value of
having a property called "link" or "hasXXXLink". After all, it's all
links in linked data. The property should carry the semantic value that
expresses meaning of the relationship is between the subject and the
object.
subject: <http://bibframe/auth/org/k.g.saur>
property: <has_some_relationship_to>
object: <http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/nr91037301>
Basically, since every property is a link between two things, "hasLink"
is not a sufficiently defined relationship.
That said, I freely admit that coming up with a clear statement of the
relationship between different authority files is not easy given
differences in cataloging rules worldwide. MADSRDF has
"hasCloseExternalAuthority," which seems to be a good way of linking
authority data, although in a very library-specific way. That may be
more accurate than the over-used OWL:sameAs, which is "different names
that refer to the same individual," but it won't be as widely understood.
Other options?
kc
--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
