[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
[log in to unmask]"
type="cite">
Which is not dissimilar to what Tom was proposing I think?
Actually, I don't think that's quite it. What is "Role1" in this
case? It can't be "editor" or some URI for editor, because then
you'd be saying:
"John hasRole editor"
"editor is author of BookA"
Unless "editor" is some unique ID, you haven't connected these
together. If it is a unique id, then it doesn't make sense as a
role. It's more like "has specific relationship to" or something
like that. Looking at what SCoRO does shows how far you have to go
to make a clear connection. First, in their turtle (which is
deceptively concise):
:Shotton a foaf:Person ; foaf:name "David Shotton" ;
scoro:hasORCID "0000-0001-5506-523X" ;
pro:holdsRoleInTime [ a pro:RoleInTime ;
pro:withRole scoro:author , scoro:senior-author ;
scoro:relatesToPublication :Adventures ] ;
This says that:
- Shotton is a person
- Shotton has name "David Shotton"
- Shotton has ORCID ...
- Shotton holdsRoleInTime Role1
- Role1 is a RoleInTime
- Role1 withRole scoro:author
- Role1 withRole scoro:senior-author
- Role1 relatesToPublication (URI)Adventures
Each role/publication relationship gets its own identifier in this
scenario. However, this doesn't give you a role in the
bibliographic entity. In fact, you have a gap there to be filled:
BibEntity1 -> ? -> Shotton
There's no relationship here, because the role, which is the
relationship, is a property of the person, not the bibliographic
entity. Let's say that you do what SCoRO does, and use
"dc:creator" as a generic relationship between the bibliographic
entity and the person.
BibEntity1 -> dc:creator -> Shotton
Then the role has to be found NOT by querying simply for Shotton,
but by querying Shotton + relatesToPublication, returning all
values for "withRole", which in this case is "author" and
"senior-author." This means that if you don't query for the role,
you don't know what the relationship is between Shotton and
BibEntity1. It also begs the question of "roles" like being the
subject of, or the owner of, something. SCoRO is only concerned
with creators so they don't cover these other cases.
[log in to unmask]"
type="cite">
It still doesn't solve our problem of roles without URIs, which cannot be in that middle position in the triple.
SCoRO itself limits the types of relationship that can be used, but the structure would allow you to adopt something closer to Tom's proposal
Owen
Yes, because role in SCoRO is an object and not a predicate, you
could use text instead of a URI. I believe this is all very
similar to the example I gave with blank nodes, although this
solution allows one to link all publications to a single Person
(or corporation, etc.) identity. I wouldn't, however, consider it
"lightweight." :-)
kc
--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet