I don't know the answers to this - but I'd like some corroboration of my thinking before we go in a different direction. In practical terms I think it is better to have the lists in so me structured form, than not, so I'd agree with the pragmatic stance of doing these lists in SKOS until this discussion comes to a conclusion. However, the sooner we can reach a conclusion the better.

Owen



-----Original Message-----
From: List for discussion on Resource Description and Access (RDA) on behalf of Karen Coyle
Sent: Thu 6/12/2008 9:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: New RDA Vocabularies available (plus other info)
 
So what should we be using, and how much work will it be to change from 
what we have done so far?

kc

Stephens, Owen wrote:
> Forgive me for working through this outloud.
> 
> So I think I'm coming round to Pete's point of view, which I think is 
> supported by Simon's comments.
> 
> SKOS supports subject/concept type hierarchies. This suggests that it 
> should be used when defining terms that express something I'm now going 
> to call 'aboutness'.
> 
> When describing the physical properties of a resource then this is not 
> 'aboutness', but actually defining a physical property. To take an example:
> 
> RDA 3.4.5.1 Recording extent of three-dimensional forms
> coin
> diorama
> exhibit
> game
> jigsaw puzzle
> medal
> mock-up
> model
> sculpture
> specimen
> toy
> 
> If we use SKOS to define this list, then we (for example) are putting 
> 'exhibit' into a subject based hierarchy. This means that we can't 
> sensibly say 'exhibition' is hierarchically above 'exhibit'. What we 
> want to do is put this into a class based ontology where we can say that 
> something that is an exhibit will belong to something called an exhibition.
> 
> Does this make sense? If it does, I'm persuaded that actually SKOS is 
> not appropriate when describing the physical properties of objects, as 
> when we do this we are describing the object, not the 'aboutness'
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: List for discussion on Resource Description and Access (RDA) on 
> behalf of Karen Coyle
> Sent: Thu 6/12/2008 7:45 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: New RDA Vocabularies available (plus other info)
> 
> Pete Johnston wrote:
>  >
>  > But for at least some properties, it seems to me that "values" are not
>  > concepts. They are persons or places or events or resources of some
>  > other type. We might still make use of "value vocabularies" (= lists of
>  > potential values) in those cases, but they would be lists/sets of
>  > persons or places or events or whatever, not lists/sets of concepts.
>  >
> 
> Perhaps some examples might help? Here are a few of the "lists" (of
> whatever type you choose to call them) that are found in RDA:
> 
> RDA production method
> [http://metadataregistry.org/vocabulary/show/id/33.html]
> 
> blueline
> blueprint
> collotype
> daguerreotype
> engraving
> etching
> lithograph
> photocopy
> photoengraving
> photogravure
> print
> white print
> woodcut
> 
> RDA layout  [http://metadataregistry.org/vocabulary/show/id/34.html]
> 
> double sided
> single sided
> 
> RDA colour  [http://metadataregistry.org/vocabulary/show/id/32.html]
> 
> chiefly coloured
> coloured
> some coloured
> 
> RDA font size  [http://metadataregistry.org/vocabulary/show/id/40.html]
> 
> giant print
> large print
> 
> RDA polarity  [http://metadataregistry.org/vocabulary/show/id/38.html]
> 
> positive
> negative
> mixed polarity
> 
> ******
> 
> These are only a few. There are about 50 different ones, I believe.
> These are from the chapter where you describe the physical properties of
> the item. I'll see if I can find any from other chapters that give a
> different viewpoint.
> 
> I don't believe that any of them will be "persons or places or events"
> but I'm never going to say never when it comes to RDA.
> 
> kc
> --
> -----------------------------------
> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
> [log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
> ph.: 510-540-7596   skype: kcoylenet
> fx.: 510-848-3913
> mo.: 510-435-8234
> ------------------------------------
> 

-- 
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
[log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596   skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------