Jeremy et al
DCMI collection reference is apt and indeed, as I recall, this effort and
projects like Europena provided some idea of aggregation as the basis for
collection. For example from the DBLIB article (Representing Cultural
Collections in Digital Aggregation and Exchange Environments
"The DCMI Metadata Terms
defines *dcterms:hasPart* as "A related resource that is included either
physically or logically in the described resource", and*dcterms:isPartOf* as
"a related resource in which the described resource is physically or
logically included." Since an item is logically included in a collection
that it has been gathered into, these terms are appropriate for
representing collection membership. However, these parthood relations may
be too general for the representation of collection membership in digital
library aggregation and exchange environments. There are many kinds of
parthood relations that may be represented with *dcterms:hasPart*. For
example, pages are parts of books, and volumes are parts of series, and
these seem like semantically distinct relationships from collection
membership. It is perhaps most accurate to characterize collection
membership as a particular kind of parthood.
A strategy that maintains a connection to the commonly used Dublin Core
property while indicating specialized semantics for collection membership
is to define a new property, *edm:isGatheredInto* specifically for
collection membership as a sub-property of *dcterms:isPartOf*. The
sub-property relationship means that every instance of
a corresponding instance of *dcterms:isPartOf*. This connection from the
specialized collection membership relation to the more general parthood
relation will support interoperability between different applications."
Carole palmer was on that article and is on the TAB and so may have some
Gary Berg-Cross, Ph.D.
Member, Ontolog Board of Trustees
Re: [rda-datafabric-ig] RE: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabri...
You are here
Jeremy et al