Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

On 7 Jun 2010, at 21:28, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > And even a non-incorporated corporate body seems as much a "person" to me as > Luke Skywalker! Without wishing to cause offence - I think you have spent too much time in libraries. ;-) Rob Styles tel: +44 (0)870 400 5000 fax: +44 (0)870 400

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

> From: ol-tech-boun...@archive.org [ol-tech-boun...@archive.org] On > Behalf Of Karen Coyle [kco...@kcoyle.net] > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:51 PM > To: ol-tech@archive.org > Subject: Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing > > Quoting E

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

ong as they are related by an appropriate relation. Jonathan From: ol-tech-boun...@archive.org [ol-tech-boun...@archive.org] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle [kco...@kcoyle.net] Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 5:51 PM To: ol-tech@archive.org Subject: Re: [ol-tech] Author

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Erik Hetzner : > In other words, we have a Person (e.g., [2]), a Person as > bibliographic entity (as in FRBR), and finally one or more > bibliographic records about the person, (e.g., [1]). Do I have that > right? I was looking at it that way, in particular because the OL gives subjec

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

..@archive.org] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle [kco...@kcoyle.net] Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 4:18 PM To: ol-tech@archive.org Subject: Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing Quoting Tom Morris : >> OL does not store >> these as authors, however, so we can be sure that all authors are >

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Tom Morris : >> OL does not store >> these as authors, however, so we can be sure that all authors are >> persons, or some other entity presenting itself as a person. > > That may be the intent, but it isn't the reality today. There are > large numbers of corporate authors in the databas

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Ian Davis : > > I assume the licensing issues have been resolved with the "official" > version and commercial use of the schema is allowed without royalty? > Is that correct? I have no idea -- you might want to contact Gordon Dunsire, who is the one working with IFLA on the FRBR regist

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: > > The vocab.org FRBR schema was NOT developed by the folks who created > FRBR and, IMO, it exhibits some misunderstandings of the intentions of > the actual developers. That's right, we developed it back in 2005 before IFLA were interested in R

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: > Quoting Jim Pitman : > >> >> The edge case of corporate authors needs to be accomodated. An instructive >> example is Nicolas Bourbaki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Bourbaki >> >> http://openlibrary.org/search?q=Nicolas+Bourbaki >> >> I

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Rob Styles : > Pre-conceived notions, yes. But the fact that the two vocabularies > provide different terms doesn't make the thing a different type of > thing necessarily. The two vocabularies provide for describing > different aspects of the same thing. How do you know that? Because they

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

alf Of Rob Styles > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 11:35 AM > To: Open Library -- technical discussion > Cc: ol-tech@archive.org > Subject: Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing > > Pre-conceived notions, yes. But the fact that the two vocabularies > provide different terms doesn

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Pre-conceived notions, yes. But the fact that the two vocabularies provide different terms doesn't make the thing a different type of thing necessarily. The two vocabularies provide for describing different aspects of the same thing. Someone can be a person, author a work and be part of a social n

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

At Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:39:49 -0700, Karen Coyle wrote: > > Quoting Erik Hetzner : > > > Are you talking about the FOAF and FBRR [1] RDF schemas? > > No. I'm talking about the properties that each has defined. I have a > comparison here: > > http://kcoyle.net/temp/comparePersonVocabs.pdf > >

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Erik Hetzner : > Are you talking about the FOAF and FBRR [1] RDF schemas? No. I'm talking about the properties that each has defined. I have a comparison here: http://kcoyle.net/temp/comparePersonVocabs.pdf The vocab.org FRBR schema was NOT developed by the folks who created FRBR a

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

At Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:59:17 -0700, Karen Coyle wrote: > > Quoting Erik Hetzner : > > > They are different realms of description, but the thing described (a > > person) is the same in both, as I see it. > > You may see it that way, but the developers of the two schemas > obviously did not beca

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Erik Hetzner : > > They are different realms of description, but the thing described (a > person) is the same in both, as I see it. You may see it that way, but the developers of the two schemas obviously did not because they have almost NO properties in common. The properties define

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

At Mon, 07 Jun 2010 06:28:18 -0700, Karen Coyle wrote: > Quoting Erik Hetzner : > > frbr (the ontology) describes a person as equivalent to foaf:Person > > [1] which seems to confirm my opinion. > > Actually, the way I read it, FRBR and FOAF are entirely different > realms, although it is possible

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Erik Hetzner : > > frbr (the ontology) describes a person as equivalent to foaf:Person > [1] which seems to confirm my opinion. Actually, the way I read it, FRBR and FOAF are entirely different realms, although it is possible that FRBR:Person could be contained within foaf:Person. FR

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

On 4 Jun 2010, at 22:20, Karen Coyle wrote: > Quoting Jim Pitman : > >> >> The edge case of corporate authors needs to be accomodated. An instructive >> example is Nicolas Bourbaki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Bourbaki >> >> http://openlibrary.org/search?q=Nicolas+Bourbaki >> >> I note t

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Hi - I have a few questions that I am hoping somebody can help me out with, since it came up. They follow inline if anybody is inclined to help out my thinking. At Fri, 04 Jun 2010 06:49:24 -0700, Karen Coyle wrote: > > […] > > Given that it is called "author", (and I'm only trying to reflect the

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

to meet it -- but I feel like OL has already decided NOT to do that, which is a reasonable decision. Jonathan From: Jonathan Rochkind Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 8:39 PM To: Open Library -- technical discussion Subject: RE: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testi

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

ying there is no reason to adhere to it solely out of principle, or reason to worry if the actual data in OL does not allow adhering to it, that's fine.) Jonathan ____ From: ol-tech-boun...@archive.org [ol-tech-boun...@archive.org] On Behalf Of Karen

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Jim Pitman : > > The edge case of corporate authors needs to be accomodated. An instructive > example is Nicolas Bourbaki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Bourbaki > > http://openlibrary.org/search?q=Nicolas+Bourbaki > > I note that > > http://openlibrary.org/authors/OL5038897A/Bourba

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

George Oates wrote: > If there's a way to "emphasize the person-ness" in author RDF in the > meantime, > I'm all for it. I strongly support this, and encourage adoption of an extensible system of placeholders for author identifiers whenever available. If there is already such a system in pl

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

> George, at the moment this isn't supported by OL's data design. Yep. We've talked quite a bit about introducing a new identifier for a person to connect an author with a subject, and intend to do it. (Not quite sure when, I'm afraid.) In terms of the UI, hopefully to browse would be a simp

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting George Oates : > 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 t

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

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

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

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 : > On Fri, Jun 4,

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Rob Styles 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

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

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

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Quoting Rob Styles : > > I'd like to understand if you're modelling this as a person, or as a > "bibliographic entity" as obviously that has implications. Another bit of evidence for bib entity rather than Person is that there is a separate entry/ID for the person as a subject, and they a

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Rob, thanks for your thoughtful ideas. My comments in-line Quoting Rob Styles : > Hi Karen, > > > I'd like to understand if you're modelling this as a person, or as a > "bibliographic entity" as obviously that has implications. Given that it is called "author", (and I'm only trying to r

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

isPrimaryTopicOf - thanks Ed. rob On 4 Jun 2010, at 12:16, Ed Summers wrote: > I support Rob's suggestions to see what you can get out of FOAF before > using RDA. But I realize you've had a hand in designing the RDA > vocabulary, so it's understandable that you want to use it. Some > comments i

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

I support Rob's suggestions to see what you can get out of FOAF before using RDA. But I realize you've had a hand in designing the RDA vocabulary, so it's understandable that you want to use it. Some comments inline below. On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:43 AM, Rob Styles wrote: > I'd like to understand

Re: [ol-tech] Author RDF for testing

Hi Karen, Here's the RDF I got back from the link you gave: @prefix rdf: . @prefix rdfs: . @prefix bibo: . @prefix rdg2: . @prefix dcterms: