Karen Coyle wrote:
I need to back up here and say that we are talking about a linked data
model, not a fixed record, so the idea of "marking" a W as "secondary"
simply doesn't exist.
Just noting that in my "alternative model", I think this could be done
after all. If you look at figure 2 in my "additional diagrams" paper,
the place to record an attribute "secondary" would be the entity marked
"Part 2 of Aggr. Work". Actually, I believe this may be a good argument
for having the model like this (although it looks a bit complicated by
having "Work 2" and "Part 2 of Aggr. Work" together at the same time),
and not simply having a simpler arrangement like this:
Aggregate work
Part 1: Work 1
Part 2: Work 2
Indeed Work 2 couldn't then be marked "secondary" as it is not secondary
"as such". It is secondary only with regard to the part it plays in the
aggregate work - and this can be captured, I think, in my model.
Heidrun
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmüller M.A.
Hochschule der Medien
Fakultät Information und Kommunikation
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart
Tel. dienstl.: 0711/25706-188
Tel. Home Office: 0711/36565868
Fax. 0711/25706-300
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
