Hi all--Karen mentions:
the big question was using the relators as properties and the object as a
string. There are folks who need to do that, and it is a shame that there isn't
an unconstrained version that would allow this, since the LoC list is the most
complete of all lists we can find.
Could RDA/RDF unconstrained properties be helpful for such use cases? I'd
expect this to also be a fairly complete list.
Looking at a very small, random sample of relator terms vs. RDA unconstrained
properties to get some idea of coverage:
Abridger /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/abr_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOrBhZE3C$ >> has abridger /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60394_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOnQQtUm2$ Enacting jurisdiction /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/enj_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOpf_HMfv$ >> (perhaps has enacting government /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60096_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOgA7RFuy$ isn't quite the same thing, and so no
coverage here?) Inscriber /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/ins_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOt8c4UCG$ >> has inscriber /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60460_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOgmi7Tlg$ Libelee-appellant /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/let_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOj1LiBpp$ >> (might not have coverage here--I only see
has appellant /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60457_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOt8kh69o$ ) Music programmer /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/mup_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOtPZCaNx$ >> has music programmer /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60894_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOrQbqO4W$ Redaktor /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/red_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOiwbxYC_$ >> (I don't see any coverage here...)
Research team head /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/rth_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOsYywMxH$ >> (lacking a direct equivalent - I only see
has research supervisor /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P61098_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOiEvTdXT$ ) Storyteller /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/stl_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOrDm8MQ5$ >> has storyteller /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60154_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOqwkPcvp$ Visual effects provider /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/vfx_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOrpYxtx3$ >> has visual effects provider /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60748_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOtUGojKo$ Writer of preface /
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/wpr_
_;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs
1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOkSNYDYN$ >> (note that RDAU 'has writer of preface' is
now deprecated, I'd guess as part of the 3R LRM alignment work, so no
coverage for this relator)
Looking at modelling for RDAU properties--RDF/XML downloaded from RDA Registry
at
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOlVYXvlJ$
, serialized here as Turtle for readability:
# take for example 'has abridger'
# omitting non-English labels, definition, and scope notes here
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60394__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOnQQtUm2$
> a rdf:Property ;
rdfs:label "has abridger"@en ;
rdakit:seeAlso
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60434__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOhdFYycG$
> ;
reg:lexicalAlias
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/abridger.en__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOq9vyC5R$
> ;
reg:status
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://metadataregistry.org/uri/RegStatus/1001__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOpROupf5$
> ;
rdfs:isDefinedBy
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOmtbHX6L$
> ;
rdfs:subPropertyOf
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60398__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOkEdFzBL$
> ;
owl:inverseOf
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/P60622__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!lxl9Xq8UBlph0d355-78XXO9w1z5XVQeCwtVPurFV7TsD3j2tnegDs1Y96UqDbwHzf4VOqNvifmf$
> ;
skos:definition "Relates a resource to an agent who contributes to a resource
by shortening a resource of a related resource without changing the general meaning or
manner of presentation."@en ;
skos:scopeNote "Substantial modification that results in the creation of a new
resource is excluded."@en .
Benjamin Riesenberg
=========
they/them
Metadata Librarian, Cataloging and Metadata Services, University of
Washington Libraries
📧 rie...@uw.edu
☎️ 34675 / (206) 543-4675
=========
Monday on campus
Tuesday on campus
Wednesday remote
Thursday on campus and/or remote
Friday remote
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG> On Behalf Of
CODE4LIB automatic digest system
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 8:56 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: CODE4LIB Digest - 20 Oct 2023 to 23 Oct 2023 - Special issue
(#2023-240)
There are 5 messages totaling 18361 lines in this issue.
Topics in this special issue:
1. [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about multiple declarations (2)
2. Deduping with finesse (2)
3. Digital Initiatives Symposium 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 07:19:49 -0700
From: Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net>
Subject: Re: [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about multiple
declarations
Thanks, Kevin. My question, originally, was whether the typing assigned can be seen as
"OR" or "AND". I know that you can define SKOS entities as objects and as
properties and these are not seen as being in conflict, but SKOS is very clear in defining this,
making sure that it is open. In the LoC case, it is an OWL declaration of ObjectProperty and the
class Role, a kind of punning. It seems to me that all of the declarations are always attached to
the subject, and therefore using them as objects would trigger inferencing inconsistencies (OWL
tends to be strict). Have you tried that? Or are you eschewing inferencing, as one often does.
In any case, the big question was using the relators as properties and the
object as a string. There are folks who need to do that, and it is a shame that
there isn't an unconstrained version that would allow this, since the LoC list
is the most complete of all lists we can find.
Declaration as an rdf:Property would do that, and that would entail less "rule"
on the property definition, while users could define their own more strict rules for
their application. Again, this brings up how far you can go with punning - adding
rdf:Property to the mix would probably just make things more confusing.
I vote for simpler and less constrained at the vocabulary level, leaving
constraints to the application profile level, so everyone can have the usage
they need.
kc
On 10/20/23 11:23 AM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
Hi Karen,
Steve is not wrong, but I think you are talking about two different things.
Using a string with a Relators property would not conform to how they have been
defined at ID.LOC.GOV. So, the answer to your specific question is: no, it is
not our expectation Relator URIs would be used as properties with the object of
the triple being either a URI or a string. Only URIs.
But the Relators URIs have also been defined such that they can be used as a
Property or as an Object, which is what Steve was driving at. We use them as
Objects in Bibframe, hence their (additional) typing as a bf:Role.
HTH,
Kevin
--
Kevin Ford
Network Development and MARC Standards Office Library of Congress
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG> On Behalf Of Karen
Coyle
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 11:41 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about multiple
declarations
CAUTION: This email message has been received from an external source. Please
use caution when opening attachments, or clicking on links.
Steve, the list doesn't need to hear this, but you are not correct here.
The relators are defined as owl:ObjectProperties (not just "properties") which
means that they cannot take text as objects. However, I want LoC to confirm that, because
this is their doing.
kc
On 10/17/23 8:17 AM, McDonald, Stephen wrote:
It is an inherent problem when creating a vocabulary--should this set of traits
be properties or types? Whichever choice you make, you face the problem that
other vocabularies may choose differently. I believe this vocabulary defines
relators as properties. But they also want to show how the terms are related to
terms in OWL and BIBFRAME where they are defined as types.
Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG> On Behalf Of
Karen Coyle
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 10:40 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about
multiple declarations
tl;dr: Does LoC intend that its relator properties be used with
both "thing" and "string" objects?
kc
On 10/10/23 8:02 AM, McDonald, Stephen wrote:
That is not correct. The statement
<rdfs:subPropertyOf
rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/contributor"/>
is a single predicate-object statement, enclosed within angle brackets.
The following statement
<rdf:type
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ObjectProperty"/>
is also separate statement, enclosed within angle brackets. The
OWL
statement is not part of the subPropertyOf statement. The next
statement is also a separate statement. So we have three statements:
subPropertyOf: DC contributor
type: owl ObjectProperty
type: BIBFRAME role
The term you were looking up is the implied subject of the
statements,
making these RDF triples.
Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG> On Behalf Of
Karen Coyle
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 5:36 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about multiple
declarations
All,
I am looking at the LoC relators at id.loc.gov, and am trying to
understand the implications of the multiple declarations for relator terms.
<rdfs:subPropertyOf
rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/contributor"/>
<rdf:type
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ObjectProperty"/>
<rdf:type
rdf:resource="http://id.loc.gov/ontologies/bibframe/Role"/>
dct:contributor is not an Object Property; there is no object
type given, so I suppose it is de facto an Annotation Property. I
read the next statement as narrowing, so at statement 2 we have:
subproperty of dct:contributor AND an owl:ObjectProperty
If my reading is correct, it would be a violation of this to use
the relator with a string rather than a thing.
(Stop me here if I'm wrong.)
Then the 3rd statement appears to say that the relator is a
bf:Role, which is a BIBFRAME-specific class. I can't wrap my head
around the functionality of this statement and would love a brief explanation.
I'm undoubtedly not into BIBFRAME deep enough to grok this.
Also, my reading is that each relator is ALL THREE OF THESE; this
is an AND not at OR. Right?
Thanks for any help,
kc
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://kcoyle.net__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8Y
S
_
BQ!eHPXLOmgHd34Nkhl7hC1y1HksSXx1U6hRMICVD7hgM2VshIAMS7KC8rwlhpiRD
M
c
J39slRBrXwrxVIJV$
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Caution: This message originated from outside of the Tufts
University organization. Please exercise caution when clicking
links or opening attachments. When in doubt, email the TTS
Service Desk at i...@tufts.edu<mailto:i...@tufts.edu> or call them directly at
617-627-3376.
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://kcoyle.net__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_
B
Q
!eHPXLOmgHd34Nkhl7hC1y1HksSXx1U6hRMICVD7hgM2VshIAMS7KC8rwlhpiRDMcJ3
9
s
lRBrXwrxVIJV$
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://kcoyle.net__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!
eHPXLOmgHd34Nkhl7hC1y1HksSXx1U6hRMICVD7hgM2VshIAMS7KC8rwlhpiRDMcJ39sl
R
BrXwrxVIJV$
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://kcoyle.net__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!hMnOycGd
oW5lta2TAs4r8dCWW5DvQGKVVt20n0IhK5XAaQZ7F6encZ6qO0T-omjyptWDC4D77H1ngO
KNjKM$
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:05:46 -0700
From: Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net>
Subject: Re: [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about multiple
declarations
Ah, forget the first paragraph. I just found the section in the (very
confusing - OWL DL? 2? ugh) documentation where they specifically
allow ObjectProperty and class. But I do want to continue (or at least
emphasize) the question of constraining the relators to ObjectProperties. I
honestly do think that such a choice should be up to the folks using the
vocabulary, based on their needs. If BIBFRAME wants to require IRIs as objects
that's fine. But I see the LoC vocabularies as not being limited to BIBFRAME -
or at least, I think that would be a good approach.
YMMV.
kc
On 10/23/23 7:19 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
Thanks, Kevin. My question, originally, was whether the typing
assigned can be seen as "OR" or "AND". I know that you can define
SKOS entities as objects and as properties and these are not seen as
being in conflict, but SKOS is very clear in defining this, making
sure that it is open. In the LoC case, it is an OWL declaration of
ObjectProperty and the class Role, a kind of punning. It seems to me
that all of the declarations are always attached to the subject, and
therefore using them as objects would trigger inferencing
inconsistencies (OWL tends to be strict). Have you tried that? Or are
you eschewing inferencing, as one often does.
In any case, the big question was using the relators as properties
and the object as a string. There are folks who need to do that, and
it is a shame that there isn't an unconstrained version that would
allow this, since the LoC list is the most complete of all lists we
can find. Declaration as an rdf:Property would do that, and that
would entail less "rule" on the property definition, while users
could define their own more strict rules for their application.
Again, this brings up how far you can go with punning - adding
rdf:Property to the mix would probably just make things more confusing.
I vote for simpler and less constrained at the vocabulary level,
leaving constraints to the application profile level, so everyone can
have the usage they need.
kc
On 10/20/23 11:23 AM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
Hi Karen,
Steve is not wrong, but I think you are talking about two different
things.
Using a string with a Relators property would not conform to how
they have been defined at ID.LOC.GOV. So, the answer to your
specific question is: no, it is not our expectation Relator URIs
would be used as properties with the object of the triple being
either a URI or a string. Only URIs.
But the Relators URIs have also been defined such that they can be
used as a Property or as an Object, which is what Steve was driving
at. We use them as Objects in Bibframe, hence their (additional)
typing as a bf:Role.
HTH,
Kevin
--
Kevin Ford
Network Development and MARC Standards Office Library of Congress
Washington, DC
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG> On Behalf Of
Karen Coyle
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 11:41 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about
multiple declarations
CAUTION: This email message has been received from an external
source. Please use caution when opening attachments, or clicking on
links.
Steve, the list doesn't need to hear this, but you are not correct here.
The relators are defined as owl:ObjectProperties (not just
"properties") which means that they cannot take text as objects.
However, I want LoC to confirm that, because this is their doing.
kc
On 10/17/23 8:17 AM, McDonald, Stephen wrote:
It is an inherent problem when creating a vocabulary--should this
set of traits be properties or types? Whichever choice you make,
you face the problem that other vocabularies may choose
differently. I believe this vocabulary defines relators as
properties. But they also want to show how the terms are related to
terms in OWL and BIBFRAME where they are defined as types.
Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG> On Behalf Of
Karen Coyle
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 10:40 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about
multiple declarations
tl;dr: Does LoC intend that its relator properties be used with
both "thing" and "string" objects?
kc
On 10/10/23 8:02 AM, McDonald, Stephen wrote:
That is not correct. The statement
<rdfs:subPropertyOf
rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/contributor"/>
is a single predicate-object statement, enclosed within angle
brackets.
The following statement
<rdf:type
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ObjectProperty"/>
is also separate statement, enclosed within angle brackets. The
OWL
statement is not part of the subPropertyOf statement. The next
statement is also a separate statement. So we have three statements:
subPropertyOf: DC contributor
type: owl ObjectProperty
type: BIBFRAME role
The term you were looking up is the implied subject of the
statements,
making these RDF triples.
Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG> On Behalf Of
Karen Coyle
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 5:36 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG
Subject: [External] [CODE4LIB] Question about multiple
declarations
All,
I am looking at the LoC relators at id.loc.gov, and am trying to
understand the implications of the multiple declarations for
relator terms.
<rdfs:subPropertyOf
rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/contributor"/>
<rdf:type
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ObjectProperty"/>
<rdf:type
rdf:resource="http://id.loc.gov/ontologies/bibframe/Role"/>
dct:contributor is not an Object Property; there is no object
type given, so I suppose it is de facto an Annotation Property.
I read the next statement as narrowing, so at statement 2 we have:
subproperty of dct:contributor AND an owl:ObjectProperty
If my reading is correct, it would be a violation of this to use
the relator with a string rather than a thing.
(Stop me here if I'm wrong.)
Then the 3rd statement appears to say that the relator is a
bf:Role, which is a BIBFRAME-specific class. I can't wrap my
head around the functionality of this statement and would love a
brief explanation.
I'm undoubtedly not into BIBFRAME deep enough to grok this.
Also, my reading is that each relator is ALL THREE OF THESE;
this is an AND not at OR. Right?
Thanks for any help,
kc
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://kcoyle.net__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8
YS_
BQ!eHPXLOmgHd34Nkhl7hC1y1HksSXx1U6hRMICVD7hgM2VshIAMS7KC8rwlhpiR
DMc
J39slRBrXwrxVIJV$
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Caution: This message originated from outside of the Tufts
University organization. Please exercise caution when clicking
links or opening attachments. When in doubt, email the TTS
Service Desk at i...@tufts.edu<mailto:i...@tufts.edu> or call them
directly at 617-627-3376.
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://kcoyle.net__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS
_BQ
!eHPXLOmgHd34Nkhl7hC1y1HksSXx1U6hRMICVD7hgM2VshIAMS7KC8rwlhpiRDMcJ
39s
lRBrXwrxVIJV$
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://kcoyle.net__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_B
Q!eHPXLOmgHd34Nkhl7hC1y1HksSXx1U6hRMICVD7hgM2VshIAMS7KC8rwlhpiRDMcJ3
9slRBrXwrxVIJV$
