On 7/24/14, 1:49 PM, Simeon Warner wrote:
bf:assigner "Rob" ;
> Crazy as this looks I think this is what one needs if you want to talk
> about the fact that "Rob" made the identifier
> http://linked-data.stanford.edu/titles/books/1234
Are we looking for "made" or "assigned?" Those are quite different. If
we want to know who is saying that identifier X identifies resource Y,
then we should look at the Open Annotation standard [1], which links
statements about things to the things, with a statement about who is
making the assertion. After all, the entity making the assertion may
well not be the entity minting the identifier. The W3C provenance work
may also be useful here, because it would provide provenance of a
statement. (Although I'm not convinced that W3C's provenance is as
clearly meaningful as OA's.)
As for who "made" an identifier, I believe that does not belong in
instance data, but needs to be something one can determine by
de-referencing the identifier. There isn't a widely accepted standard
for this, AFAIK. VOID? [2] or a variation thereof? Changeset? [3] I see
folks developing their own methods for versioning (e.g. looking under
the hood at id.loc.gov individuals, rdavocabulary.info, dcterms), so it
seems that creatorship and versioning standards would be very useful.
kc
[1] http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/void/
[3] http://vocab.org/changeset/schema.html
--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
