Andy Powell wrote:
> I suspect that I mainly added the FRBR stuff to cope with the use of
> 'item' in the 'collection description' properties. As redefined, you
> can't have a collection of concepts or a collection of people, only a
> collection of PhysicalResources or a collection of DigitalResources.
This also raises the interesting question of whether the new class
describes/defined in
http://dublincore.org/architecturewiki/DCPropertyDomainsRanges
as
Collection: The class of everything that is an aggregation of one or
more DigitalResources or PhysicalResources.
is the same as the existing class dcmitype:Collection ("A collection is
an aggregation of items. The term collection means that the resource is
described as a group; its parts may be separately described and navigated")
Or whether this new class is in fact a subclass of dcmitype:Collection.
I don't know the answer: it all depends on the definition of "item" in
the description/definition of dcmitype:Collection. ;-)
Pete
--
Pete Johnston
Research Officer (Interoperability)
UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
tel: +44 (0)1225 383619 fax: +44 (0)1225 386838
mailto:[log in to unmask]
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/p.johnston/
|