On 7/10/14, 11:30 AM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
> Dear Karen,
> The complexity arises if someone other than OCLC (?) asserts something 
> about a VIAF URI.
> So, for example (and, please note, I've used a different URI, because, 
> well, the one your provided is problematic for my purpose here), what 
> if /I/ asserted:
> skos:note "He smelled very badly, all 
> the time."

And yet, OCLC does make statements about "things" in the 
WorldCat data:

         a            schema:Intangible ;
         schema:name  "Mathematical statistics."@en .

         a                   schema:Place ;
         dcterms:identifier  "cau" .

         a       schema:Intangible .

I don't think we can generally say that linked data creators do or 
should avoid making statements using a subject not minted by them, 
especially since any non-literal object can be the subject of another 
statement. I may want to say:

<> skos:label "Statistics"@en

The use of does not imply that the statement was issued by 
the owners of That's why we need provenance for statements 
and, as explained elsewhere in this thread, the URI does not provide that.

I looked for but could not find stats on subject usage in LOD, but there 
is massive re-use of properties in the LOD space minted by third 
parties, as noted in the Linked Open Vocabulary statistics. [1] BIBFRAME 
has eschewed this, but that seems not to be a problem for others.


> On the surface it looks like VIAF/OCLC said Raphael smelled badly, all 
> the time because, provenance-wise, the domain tracks back to OCLC.  In 
> reality, I said it, but you cannot tell.
> If we use global URIs, and additional statements are made against 
> those, then something like this could happen.
> Yours,
> Kevin
> *From:*Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Smith-Yoshimura,Karen
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:40 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [BIBFRAME] Bibframe and Linked Data (Authorities)
> Kevin --
> Re:
> >There's been lots of talk about provenance and the like in a global 
> graph of data, but I feel most of those discussions rely on fairly 
> technical mechanisms, the complexity of >which outweigh the simplicity 
> of minting one's own URI.  (Also, the provenance statements will need 
> their own URIs!)
> Doesn't show the provenance is VIAF? 
> What's complex about this?
> Karen S-Y

Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask]
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet