Dear Jörg,


The idea is that properties, for example, in the Bibframe vocabulary be underspecified – meaning many do not have defined domains and ranges – and that Bibframe Profiles provide a way to add specifics.  We foresee Bibframe Profiles being used differently depending on which community is using Bibframe (and even within communities).


For example, the RDA community (libraries) may define a Work differently than CCO users (museums).  A CCO profile that anticipates a sculpture might specify the use of the bf:dimensions property with a bf:Work.  If thinking purely of literature printed in book form, one would assume the bf:dimensions property would go with an Instance (the material embodiment of the Work, i.e. the bound volume), but such a data point can be inherent to the conceptual idea behind an artwork.  A colossal marble sculpture is, at a conceptual level, very different from a small bronze.  [Caveat: Although I hope this RDA/CCO example is illustrative, my using “bf:dimensions” is not the best choice because it is currently defined with a domain of bf:Instance in the vocabulary.  Alas.] 


Does this help?







From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2014 2:14 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BIBFRAME] Bibframe Profile not in RDF?


I have just learned about the Bibframe Profiles.


Since Bibframe is based on RDF, why are Bibframe Profiles not based on RDF?


As I understand, the constraints described in Bibframe Profiles are constraints on RDF elements and vocabularies, and do not constrain mere data. I'm not sure about what is meant with "structural constraints", maybe also integrity constraints?


So expressing Bibframe Profiles in RDF as rules would be more beneficial to the semantic web community.  I think it is possible to express the rules as an ontology. By doing this, informal notations or plain JSON or EBNF notations would no longer be necessary to express a Bibframe Profile, the document could be rewritten to use RDF (serialized in Turtle, JSON-LD, etc. whatever is convenient)