Re: Tim Berners-Lee on the Semantic Web

From: Dan Matei <Dan_at_nyob>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:45:07 +0200
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Coyle <lists_at_KCOYLE.NET>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:21:10 -0700


> 
> Dan, I think these become relationships. There's no reason why the same 
> person can't be president of the US and governor of Arkansas -- those 
> are acts by that person, they don't change the "person-ness". But you 
> want both uses of Clinton to have the same identifier, because they were 
> both the same man, just in a different role.

Not good enough for me :-)

Clinton with the president hat on (say, as author) is not exactly the same as Clinton himself or Clinton as governor.

So, we should have:

a (record for a) person: Clinton (himself, as a free individual :-);
a (record for a) persona: the person Clinton associated with the legal body US;
a (record for a) persona: the person Clinton associated with the legal body Arkansas;

And those personas could be blank RDF nodes (RDF anonymous resources), but I prefer them to be URI-ed resources.

> Lewis Carroll is a persona, and is the pseudonym of CLDogson. That's not 
> a hard relationship to make, I don't believe. The question is how you 
> divide person/persona, and I think that becomes a convention of the 
> community (as we changed that convention between AACR and AACR2). As 
> long as the relationships are explicit, then I think you can make sense 
> out of it. In essence you have:
> 
> Dodgson
> Carroll
> Dodgson -- has pseudonym -- Carroll
> Carroll -- is pseudonym of -- Dodgson

Exactlly: Carrol and Dodgson are entities (related to each other) not just character strings (elements of an entity).

Dan
Received on Sun Oct 25 2009 - 13:49:30 EDT