tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post7201383430929058091..comments2023-09-29T08:51:56.163-07:00Comments on Coyle's InFormation: Interpretations of FRBR ClassesKaren Coylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02519757456533839003noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-52681956723524015712007-12-17T06:18:00.000-08:002007-12-17T06:18:00.000-08:00Alain, I'll think about your examples... And come ...Alain, I'll think about your examples... And come back later.Andrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02150179986862206017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-66799899997280926132007-12-10T23:19:00.000-08:002007-12-10T23:19:00.000-08:00Andris:Thanks for sharing your schema.Have you ela...Andris:<BR/><BR/>Thanks for sharing your schema.<BR/><BR/>Have you elaborated something to add places and geographical data?<BR/><BR/>If you wish to have exercises, you could give a try to describe correspondance (letters) publishing down to individual autographs.<BR/><BR/>Years ago, I helped a group of academic editors to index Victor Hugo's letters and, given dBase capacities at the time, had made choices very similar to yours: persons and corporate bodies ("personnes morales" in French legal terms) were in the same table.<BR/>Relations between individuals and bodies were managed through autojointures.<BR/>A tricky one: a letter addressed to a family... Where do you stop in the genealogical relations?<BR/><BR/>The same went for places.<BR/><BR/>Another tricky thing is the description of dates and durations of relations together with events.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-77129275025298414672007-12-10T15:05:00.000-08:002007-12-10T15:05:00.000-08:00Beside a "good sit-down", it would be useful if we...Beside a "good sit-down", it would be useful if we'd list hard-to-describe cases, excercises (like "an article in a newspaper", "translation of a book based on a movie", etc.), that all of us would complete with her or his own vision, or version of FRBR. RDF/XML (the hierarchial), the Object-lover, and my favourite, the Relational-way are different schools for similar problems. Religions for "beleivers". It's better see each "at work", not by itself.<BR/><BR/>We're (my and my collegue in Hungary) developing a union/social catalog, and we'll probably use the following relational schema to achieve FRBR like functionality in it. The "Work, Expression, Manifestation, Item, Person, Corporate Body" part of it.<BR/><BR/>http://www.gliffy.com/publish/1334968/<BR/><BR/>Works and Expressions are in one table (this gives us flexibility, we don't have to argue in which one a certain thing belongs). A Work is a Work in the FRBR sense, but Series, collections of novels, poems are also (several fields will help to describe the kind of the Work: novel, short story, article, etc.). Flexible connections can be formed between them ("translation of", "based on", "version of", "part of" - for series, etc) instead. Persons, Coropate bodies and Publishers are also in one table (Entity), and also using connections between themselfes (with possibilities for "part of", "successor of", etc.). Entities contibute to Works through Roles (publisher of, writer, illustrator, etc.). Works are conencted to Publications (Books, Serials, web-portals) through Content in an M:N relation. Each editions of a Book is a separate publication, and individual Newspapers too. Copies are equal to Items.<BR/><BR/>Maybe my english (and so choosing of words) are not perfect, but I hope it's still understandable - and you can see the difference, the flexibility of the version I propose.<BR/><BR/>I'd be happy to hear about hard to describe cases...Andrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02150179986862206017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-87482372886136714702007-12-10T08:40:00.000-08:002007-12-10T08:40:00.000-08:00re: use of 'Subject' as class in FRBR in RDF.I do...re: use of 'Subject' as class in FRBR in RDF.<BR/><BR/>I don't have any special insight, but it looks to me that the FRBR in RDF has included 'Subject' as a 'superset' in the same way as Endeavor and ResponsibleEntity - so it isn't meant to replace the idea of showing 'aboutness' by use of relationships. In this way it seems relatively consistent.Owenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15363304748950192248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3338174527262061848.post-35289064200233601102007-12-09T06:33:00.000-08:002007-12-09T06:33:00.000-08:00The table is useful. FYI, there is also an extende...The table is useful. FYI, there is also an <A HREF="http://vocab.org/frbr/extended" REL="nofollow">extended FRBR ontology</A>.<BR/><BR/>For background: Rich had started with a rather baroque integrated ontology. When Ian started working with him, he suggested splitting it into core and extended.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and if you're curious, the <A HREF="http://musicontology.com" REL="nofollow">music ontology</A> is an interesting creative interpretation of FRBR.Brucehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14395303309033247299noreply@blogger.com