Quoting George Oates <g...@archive.org>: > My vote would be to adopt the Freebase model. An author is a person, > after all. > Seems to allow more flexibility into other systems that aren't > biblio specific. > > Generic person, perhaps with types of author, subject, and > potentially even OL > user (but that wouldn't necessarily be exposed in the RDF, I guess).
George, at the moment this isn't supported by OL's data design. I could try to export the author RDF emphasizing the "person-ness," but the structure subject/person isn't correlated with the author/, and there isn't a way to bring them together in the API if the database treats them otherwise. Both persons would need to share an identifier, but they don't. And I do think this would create considerable differences in the UI, although Edward and Anand, who best understand the underlying structure, may have some wisdom on that. Since you are directing the project, however, you could instigate a design change of this nature. kc > > Karen Coyle wrote: >> I don't disagree, but I think this is a new discussion about how OL >> models the bibliographic world. Unfortunately, I can only attempt to >> output what has been modeled. I suspect there are numerous points >> where we could discuss the model being used. >> >> kc >> >> >> Quoting Tom Morris <tfmor...@gmail.com>: >> >>> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Rob Styles <rob.sty...@talis.com> wrote: >>>> So the question is does OL want to talk about a subject heading and >>>> a bibliographic entity that are different things both referring in >>>> some way to the same person, or just refer to the same person. >>>> >>>> Both are possible to model and both are perfectly valid, but having >>>> the bibliographic entity and the subject heading does introduce >>>> complexity from the library that most people don't immediately >>>> understand. >>>> >>> I'm not convinced separate entities makes sense even in the context of >>> a library, but it's definitely going to confuse real world users. >>> Intentionally introducing such an archaic concept into a modern design >>> seems wrong to me. >>> >>> For what it's worth Freebase uses a single entry for the author, the >>> book subject, the film subject, the person the glacier was named >>> after, the influencer of other academics, etc. >>> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/knud_johan_victor_rasmussen >>> >>> To my mind, these linkages are where the power is and forcing >>> indirection through an artificial entity like a card catalog card just >>> weakens the linkages and makes them harder to follow. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> [25 lines of .sig, advertising, and corporate privacy notices elided] >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ol-tech mailing list >>> Ol-tech@archive.org >>> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to >>> ol-tech-unsubscr...@archive.org >>> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Ol-tech mailing list > Ol-tech@archive.org > http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to > ol-tech-unsubscr...@archive.org > -- Karen Coyle kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet _______________________________________________ Ol-tech mailing list Ol-tech@archive.org http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to ol-tech-unsubscr...@archive.org
