Quoting Erik Hetzner <[email protected]>:
> What I meant to be getting at is that the rdf:type of the resources > M1, M2, ... is (currently) workManifested, while the predicate linking > W and M1, M2, ... is frbr:Manifestation. I think this is backwards; > they rdf:type should be frbr:Manifestation, while the predicate should > be workManifested. Thanks, Erik. From this conversation I have come to the realization that there is no way to say: "this Work is Manifested as..." using FRBR concepts. Instead, what I need to do is to create short "records" for each manifestation that in effect each say: "manifests WorkX". I don't think I can encapsulate the whole in a single rdf/xml unit without creating some uber-structure that holds them together (which would perhaps be a representation of FRBR Group 1 as a super-class, something the the FRBR committee has rejected). I'll mock up something and post it before I code it into the OL template. kc > > As to which direction workManifested points, or its domain or range, I > have no clue, but I assume you are correct here. > > best, Erik > _______________________________________________ > Ol-tech mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] > -- Karen Coyle [email protected] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet _______________________________________________ Ol-tech mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
