Perhaps if a reciprocal relationship does not exist, it is neccesary for you to create one?
I am not sure what 'linked data' communities think about the general idea of definining recicprocal relationships where the range of one is the domain of the other. But it seems to me it's generally useful to have such. And RDA/FRBR defines reciprocal relationships for nearly all of the subsidiary relationships between group 1 entities, I have not looked up the exact names but for instance something like "isAdaptedBy" vs "isAnAdaptationOf". Shouldn't there be the same for these fundamental 'ontological' relationships? Ideally I think it's best when we can package the data up in the way that's going to be most useful and convenient for our expected use cases -- not have to shoehorn the data into different packages because, for instance, a reciprocal relationship doesn't exist. ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 9:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ol-tech] New treatment of frbr:manifestation in work RDF 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] _______________________________________________ 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]
