Friends Still working on converting our ancient (i.e. 20th century) databases to something more current, I still have problems :-(
My records for the statements with literal objects have (of course) the fields: • subject id • predicate id • object (string/number/date/XMLLiteral) Besides I have: • syntaxEncodingScheme (for the string/XMLLiteral-statements) • P91-has_unit (for the number-statements, in case they are dimensions :-) • P72-has_language (for the string-statements) Moreover, in order to keep under control the proliferation of subproperties, I added: • predicate type id (of the ".1 P2" kind) • object type id (also of ".1 P2" kind) In this image https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B33eKhOVEE6-aEhMNFRIOTVDaWs/edit I show (as an example) 3 alternative ways of avoiding the specialisation of P78-is_identified_by. I find merits for each but I'm in doubt. What do you think is preferable ? Should I judge on a case-by-case basis ? Or something different would be better ? Is "object type id" useless ? What if I want to say that a string-object is a transliteration ? Thanks, Dan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dan Matei director, Direcția Cercetare, Evidență a Patrimoniului Cultural Mobil, Imaterial și Digital [Movable, Intangible and Digital Heritage Department] (aka CIMEC) Institutul Național al Patrimoniului [National Heritage Institute], București [Bucharest, Romania] tel. (+4)021 317 90 72; fax (+4)021 317 90 64, www.cimec.ro
