FW: RDF expression of FRBR

First of all, thank you for the kind words, Owen.

I just wanted to address the concern first raised by Bruce about my not
using and building on the existing FRBR RDF expression.  (I tried to address
this at the blog, too, but wanted to address it here since it has come up in
a couple of NGC4LIB posts.)  My rules agree with the FRBR entity
definitions, but, as I have argued elsewhere, I don't think FRBR's mapping
tables agree with its own definitions.  Elements of the bibliographic
description  that clearly apply to expression as defined in FRBR (e.g. '2nd
rev. ed.') are mapped in the FRBR tables to manifestation.  So my question
to you all is: what are the implications of reusing the FRBR
work/expression/manifestation entity definitions?  Would that not imply
reusing the entity mapping of bibliographic elements that are part of the
FRBR RDF expression?

Thanks for any advice the data modelling folks can offer...

Martha

-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu]On Behalf Of Stephens, Owen
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 9:06 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: [NGC4LIB] RDF expression of FRBR


Martha has done some impressive work in both producing Cataloguing Rules
and RDF, but a question raised on her blog by Bruce D'Arcus
(http://yeecatrule.wordpress.com/2007/09/28/hello-world/#comments) is
why not use and build on the existing FRBR RDF expression at
http://vocab.org/frbr/frbr-core-20050810

Although I realise that Martha's rules deviate from FRBR, I think that
if we can build on what looks like some relatively good work (to my
admittedly untutored eye) then we should.

Any comments?

Owen

Owen Stephens
Assistant Director: e-Strategy and Information Resources
Imperial College London Library
Imperial College London
South Kensington
London SW7 2AZ


Tel: 020 7594 8829
Email: o.stephens_at_imperial.ac.uk
<blocked::mailto:o.stephens_at_imperial.ac.uk>