James Howison wrote:
How would a book review fit into this?
Good question. I think that's dropped out somewhere.
Jstor for example makes this a
separate type, with specific data for a reviewed article etc. One could
imagine having a collection of reviewed articles.
This is a little tricky. I think if I have a book review in a newspaper,
then perhaps it ought to be typed as both an Article and a Review?
Reviews can be issued in different forms, including broadcast on the radio.
Yes, one could also just do this in the title field as people gave done
for years.
I guess that level of metadata is more akin to having a listed of cited
references than a separate type.
Well, it could instead be a relation, and maybe should be.
<http://ex.net/1> a bibo:Article ;
bibo:reviewOf <http://ex.net/2> .
That works for me. What do you think?
And there's nothing stopping the RDF format from allowing links to cited
works, perhaps even with citation types, of which a review would be
one.
Exactly.
If such a link was in the record then special layout rules could
apply. But this seems to much of an edge case?
I'd also like to see an encouragement for not includng the year in the
'container' for conference proceedings/presentation.
Speaking of which how would this type system cover the common practice
of sing a conference presentation which doesn't publish proceedings, and
then making that available via a webpage?
A conference paper is typically presented at a conference, and may be
published in either a proceeding, or simply directly on the web.
So:
<http://ex.net/1> a bibo:Document ;
bibo:presentedAt <http://ex.net/2> ; # the conference
dcterms:isPartOf <http://ex.net/3> . # the proceedings
This might suggest that isPartOf is a bit vague for your purposes. The
Zotero guys suggested instead something like reproducedIn, which is
probably closer.
As for one published straight to the web, I'd do just:
<http://ex.net/1> a bibo:Document ;
bibo:url <http://ex.net/1> ; # strictly speaking redundant
bibo:presentedAt <http://ex.net/2> . # the conference
Ivan Herman was wondering if maybe we don't want something like
bibo:ConferenceDocument or some such, and I think that's an open
question indeed.
Bruce
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
