On 1/15/15 1:53 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
> In order to express information about the abstract Work, abstract 
> Instance, real world Person, and so forth, there MUST be a URI that 
> identifies that object.  If the URI that has the class bf:Work is not 
> that, then we need another URI.

Like the need that led to SKOS-XL, there will be a need to make 
statements about the Work *graph* (aka, the metadata) - who created it, 
when, maybe even cataloger's notes. It would make sense to me for these 
to be in one or more graphs of their own, linking to the Work graph but 
not to the Work.

Also, the FRBR-defined bibliographic relationships (translation of, 
supplement to, edition of, etc.) are all clearly defined as being 
between bibliographic "things" - not between bibliographic 
descriptions/records. However, I suspect there is a bit of confusion in 
FRBR about this as well, since it was originally developed before the 
concept of RWO was commonly known and is very "record-y". Need to think 
about that.


Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask]
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600