I suppose another alternative to METS would be some form of the
Atom-based aggregate. I tend to think that custom ontologies and Atom
are both potentially more complex solutions than the structMap, but that
view is very much in the eye of the beholder. At least Atom would be
another standard ontology.
Greg
On 05/19/2010 12:19 PM, Andrew Curley wrote:
Richard,
We don't want to use METS to encode this relationship because we don't
need to add another complicated datastream to our objects just to
answer this relatively small problem that, seemingly, can be solved by
creating our own ontologies and using the RDF to solve the problem.
The decision I think will rest on whether we want to express the
sequence in the parent object using RDF:Seq when 3.4 is released in
favor of embedding the sequence in the child objects. I understand
your concerns and see why you would use METS, but for us it would be a
big hammer. Too bad there are no librarian-sanctioned RDF ontologies
that concern themselves with cataloging at the page level.
Andrew
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 8:13 AM, HIGGINS R.I.
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Out of interest, why not use METS to encode this relationship at a
book level?
As always with FEDORA there seem to be several ways to do things,
so it is always useful to know why one particular one has been
chosen. I find that a METS file for the book level digital object
stores all the metadata in one place which simplifies reuse by
applications. Although you can never eliminate getting data entry
just plain wrong in any format, I could see a situation with the
RDF solution where one mistake would mean you jumping into a
different book altogether (as opposed to the file not found errors
I get when I get the METS file wrong ...)
- - - - -
# Richard Higgins
# Durham University Library
# Archives & Special Collections
# Palace Green
# Durham
# DH1 3RN
# E-Mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*From:* Andrew Curley [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>]
*Sent:* 18 May 2010 22:17
*To:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [Fedora-commons-users] Object Order Using RDF
Does anyone have experience using RDF to describe sequential
relationships between objects? For example, given two objects
representing two page images, I wish to describe that one
object precedes the other and/or that one object follows the
other. There is nothing in the Fedora ontology that facilitates
this relationship so I was wondering if anyone in the community
has codified this relationship through RDF or knows of an RDF
standard which facilitates this description.
Thanks,
Andrew Curley
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Fedora-commons-users mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Fedora-commons-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Fedora-commons-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users
