Quoting Jonathan Rochkind <[email protected]>:
So "dc:relation" does sound like the right vocabulary element for
generic "related web page page", thanks. Is the value of dc:relation
_neccesarily_ a URI/URL? I hope so, because otherwise I'm not sure
dc:relation is sufficient, as I really do need something that says
"some related URL".
dc:relation takes a URI as its value. There is nothing in DC to
indicate a *location* if that is what you are trying to express. DC
also doesn't have a way, that I know of, to express what the specific
relation is (which is what MARC tries to do, albeit not very
successfully, with its indicators).
kc
Thanks for the advice,
Jonathan
Ed Summers wrote:
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Doran, Michael D <[email protected]> wrote:
Of course, subfield $3 values are not any kind of controlled
vocabulary, so it's hard to do much with them programmatically.
A few years ago I analyzed the subfield 3 values in the Library of
Congress data up at the Internet Archive [1]. Of course it's really
simple to extract, but I just pushed it up to GitHub, mainly to share
the results [2].
I extracted all the subfield 3 values from the 12M? records, and then
counted them up to see how often they repeated [3]. As you can see
it's hardly controlled, but it might be worthwhile coming up with some
simple heuristics and properties for the familiar ones: you could
imagine dcterms:description being used for "Publisher description",
etc.
Of course the $3 in your catalog data might be different from LCs, but
maybe we could come up with a list of common ones on a wiki somewhere,
and publish a little vocabulary that covered the important relations?
//Ed
[1] http://www.archive.org/details/marc_records_scriblio_net
[2] http://github.com/edsu/beat
[3] http://github.com/edsu/beat/raw/master/types.txt
--
Karen Coyle
[email protected] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
