Pete:
We were putting those comments in some of our earlier registered
properties, but have ceased doing that--they will be deleted when we get
around to dealing with some of the remaining editorial issues. The
relationships with FRBR entities will indeed be part of the AP, not the
property itself.
Diane
Pete Johnston wrote:
> Just to focus briefly on the suggestion of recommending the use of the
> RDA properties:
>
>
>> The RDA standard is set to be published early in 2009, and
>> the DCMI/RDA TG has already registered provisionally the
>> final list of properties and subproperties approved by the
>> Joint Steering Committee (the body engaged
>> in developing the standard). These properties, currently
>> 250 of them,
>> can be viewed at
>> http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/list/schema_id/1.html
>>
>> There are amongst these properties, the following:
>>
>> Date of capture (subproperty of Place and date of capture), at:
>> http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/show/id/272.html
>>
>> Edition statement, at:
>> http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/show/id/2.html
>>
>
> The description of the latter includes a comment that says
>
> "Associated with the FRBR Manifestation entity."
>
> It stops short of saying formally that the domain of the property is the
> class of FRBR Manifestations, but there is at least a suggestion there
> that that is the case.
>
> The Libraries AP is not - in its current form at least - based on FRBR
> i.e. the things the are describing are not FRBR Manifestations, so I
> think that potentially there is an issue there - though, yes, it may be
> that the RDA folk decide to define their properties more "loosely" and
> remove that association with FRBR Manifestation, and defer it to the
> description set profile rather than associating it with the property
> itself.
>
> More generally, I do think we have to be careful with this sort of
> issue: it seems to me most properties "out there" _aren't_ defined (like
> the DCMES/DC Terms) to be applicable to (more or less) any resource;
> they are defined in the context of specific models/ontologies, to be
> applicable to specific classes of resource, and we need to be sensitive
> to that when recommending their "reuse".
>
> Pete
>
>
>
|