 |
 |
Ray, Best of luck riding out the storm! I think your solution of having two potentially different resources for a meeting (as Event/Agent) is compelling, although Reinhold offers a different perspective[1]. It's true, for example, that we have two different resources representing Barack Obama the person[2] and Barack Obama as President[3]. However, both of these resources are clearly of the same type (Agent). I think the tension we're addressing in this thread is that it seems inconsistent, in the context of the wider Web, to say that an entity (bf:Meeting) that seems to be an Event is actually modeled as a subclass of Agent in the BF ontology. Wouldn't it be more logical and interoperable to model meetings/conferences as Events without having to maintain an exception that must strike those outside the bibliographic domain as ... idiosyncratic? [1] http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1601&L=bibframe&T=0&P=7005 [2] http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n94112934.html [3] http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2008168642.html -- Tim A. Thompson Metadata Librarian (Spanish/Portuguese Specialty) Princeton University Library <[log in to unmask]> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Tim > I’m a bit handcuffed at the moment due to a weather/traffic emergency in > DC and don’t have all the messages available to me but I did mention in one > post that meeting or conference as an event is a completely different > resource, with a completely different URI, than the meeting/conference as > an agent. Why is that not sufficient? > Ray > > On Jan 21, 2016, at 9:23 AM, Tim Thompson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Ray, the problem centers on bf:Meeting. The argument being made (I > think--others can correct me) is that a meeting/conference is really an > Event and should be modeled as such, but that BIBFRAME (following > traditions rooted in the conventions of the card catalog) continues to > model meetings/conferences as Agents. > > Tim > > -- > Tim A. Thompson > Metadata Librarian (Spanish/Portuguese Specialty) > Princeton University Library > <[log in to unmask]> > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> >> On Jan 21, 2016, at 4:58 AM, Meehan, Thomas <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> That said, couldn’t Bibframe for example take the view that Event isn’t >> an Agent >> >> >> This thread has gotten long enough that I am having trouble finding where >> this idea originated that Event is an Agent. It isn’t. I’ve said that a >> number of times: Event is not an Agent. Making Event an Agent has never >> been contemplated. >> >> Ray >> >> >> > >