At Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:39:49 -0700,
Karen Coyle wrote:
> Quoting Erik Hetzner <>:
> > Are you talking about the FOAF and FBRR [1] RDF schemas?
> No. I'm talking about the properties that each has defined. I have a  
> comparison here:
> The FRBR schema was NOT developed by the folks who created  
> FRBR and, IMO, it exhibits some misunderstandings of the intentions of  
> the actual developers. So consider that one person's interpretation.  
> IFLA, the "owner" of FRBR, is in the process of defining the  
> properties and classes here:
> The Person class does not define it as equivalent to FOAF.
> I know that there are folks who feel that the FRBR should be  
> the one used, but it is very different from what IFLA is creating, so  
> we find ourselves with two FRBR's that are only superficially the  
> same. Since IFLA is the maintenance agency for FRBR (and FRBR has  
> changed since the version was created and will change even  
> more when integrated with FRAD and FRASAR), I believe that we should  
> take its version seriously.

Hi Karen -

Thanks for the pointer. I was not aware the IFLA was working on an
official FRBR RDF schema. That is great news to me.

I will have to think more on the issue of equivalence between a frbr
person and a foaf person.

I will explain why this question arises. In some software I am working
on, I have a table to define a FRBR Person. To make it easier to deal
with, one can add one or more URIs to the person. Right now I have
some custom code to pull a name & birth/death dates from
Soon I will add the same to pull from OL.

But semantically I was wondering, are these the same (owl:sameAs)? In
the case of OL, it seems at least the answer is “no”. The OL URL [1]
does not identify Mary Wollstonecraft, but rather the bib record about
her. So the relationship should be rdfs:isDefinedBy. On the other hand
the record at dbpedia [2] identifies the person. But would this be
owl:sameAs the FRBR entity (or resource) that I am defining? You are
saying, if I understand you correctly, that these have a different

In other words, we have a Person (e.g., [2]), a Person as
bibliographic entity (as in FRBR), and finally one or more
bibliographic records about the person, (e.g., [1]). Do I have that

Many thanks for your help with this issue.

best, Erik


Attachment: pgpnOa6NE3LpM.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Ol-tech mailing list
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to

Reply via email to