On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, B. Eversberg wrote:
>
> What S. Lundberg is describing:
> >
> > In my view, to describe such things one need to create a surrogate for the
> > "real" thing (which usually doesn't exist on the web) and then express
> > the relation between the object at hand and that "real" thing.
> >
> is dealt with at length and breadth by the IFLA "Functional
> Requirements" study.
> http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.htm
Yeah, I had that one in mind when writing this piece of RDF.
...
> So, I'm afraid to say, S. Lundbergs metadata example below, while
> presumably accurately tagged, is largely useless since it gives
> neither uniform title nor opus number nor does it cite the composer's
> name in any controlled form. Everything that really matters for a
> music database user is not as they expect it and need it.
Well, to be honest, I do not know if it is correctly tagged. It is
correctly tagged, but I'm not sure it means what I believe it does. That
was the reason I wrote my example. I made no effort to put in opus
numbers, normalize names etc.
Sigge
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|