Tom, I totally agree that the relationships must be much simpler than what is in FRBR -- a small selection from FRBR would suffice. Note that the OL has Works and Editions, and that Editions are kind of a combination of FRBR Expression and Manifestation. This means that there may be some Expression->Expression relationships that could be applied to OL Editions.
I have no problem with recording that one work cites another. That to me is not terribly different to "adapts" -- although the citation itself is a piece of the content, it establishes an intellectual relationship between the works that perhaps could be better expressed as "uses ideas from" or "builds on." kc On 11/18/12 3:05 PM, Tom Morris wrote: > I like the idea of recording relationships, but I think of citations as > being content as opposed to metadata which seems to be OpenLibrary's > main focus. > > The FRBR relationships seem like they could be simplified. Freebase > uses a single adapted_work/adapted_from property pair without having > separate properties for each source/target type pairing like FRBR seems > to have. That still allows you to link the film adapted from the > musical adapted from the play adapted from the novel. Similar > simplifications could probably be applied to some of the other FRBR > relationships. > > Tom > > > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Karen Coyle <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Ben, I don't know of any that have implemented the FRBR relationships > *yet*. That leaves the arena wide open, and being the first to do this > would be very interesting! > > kc > > On 11/18/12 2:23 PM, Ben Companjen wrote: > > Of course, FRBR! I could have thought of that (and CiTO) :) > > So the thinking of relationships we might need has already been done > > and "only" the thinking of how to record these relationships and > > designing and implementing changes to the interface are left. > > > > Are there other catalogues that show any of the FRBR work > relationships? > > > > On 18 November 2012 17:21, Karen Coyle <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> FRBR provides a set of relationships between works and it would > be good > >> to have links that are meaningful, not just "link." "Cites" > isn't one of > >> them, but there are citation vocabularies. If there were more > lists in > >> OL those could be mined for statistical relationships. > Librarything is > >> able to do this so they can give a small set of the most related > books. > >> > >> - my "cheat sheet" of FRBR relationships: > >> http://kcoyle.net/rda/group1relsby.html > >> it shouldn't be too hard to make a selection of a small > number of > >> these for OL use > >> - the CITO vocabulary: > >> > >> > > http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/cgi-bin/lode/req.py?req=http:/purl.org/spar/cito > >> again, a small selection might be useful > >> > >> kc > >> > >> > >> On 11/18/12 5:22 AM, Ben Companjen wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Although I know the developers are mostly working on non-OL > projects, > >>> I would like to share a (possibly very old) idea for enhancement of > >>> Open Library: direct links from one work to another. > >>> > >>> It is not an original idea, as most digital libraries for > scientific > >>> literature have links from articles to cited/referenced articles or > >>> book chapters. For me as a student it has become a natural way of > >>> browsing the "library". > >>> Today I wanted to look up the Thesaurus of English words and > phrases > >>> by Peter Mark Roget and found not only the multiple works (which > >>> should most likely be one work) by Roget, but also "Roget's > thesaurus > >>> ..." by other authors - edited versions, perhaps reviews or > manuals, > >>> etc. > >>> > >>> I think being able to say "works A and B are related, because A > is (a > >>> review of | a manual to | partly based on | ...) B" would be a > great > >>> addition to Open Library as a catalog. (And I didn't see this > idea in > >>> the list of issues on GitHub.) > >>> > >>> Ben > >>> > >>> P.S. Yes, you could add a hyperlink to the work, but if you > used the > >>> label to express the relationship between works, it would only make > >>> sense to human users. > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Ol-tech mailing list > >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Karen Coyle > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://kcoyle.net > >> ph: 1-510-540-7596 <tel:1-510-540-7596> > >> m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234> > >> skype: kcoylenet > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ol-tech mailing list > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > > Ol-tech mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > -- > Karen Coyle > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> http://kcoyle.net > ph: 1-510-540-7596 <tel:1-510-540-7596> > m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234> > skype: kcoylenet > _______________________________________________ > Ol-tech mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > [email protected] <mailto:[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]
