Group Mailing list Archive

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabri...

Gary,
Of course, and it is our intent. We have already begun, as Ulrich and
Thomas mentioned, by working through the definitions directly within the
RDA instance of the DFT tool so that our work is visible to all as we go.
Best
Bridget

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabri...

Bridget et al,
It would seem that the Research Data Collections WG is the proper place for
this conversation and work advance and that you have already assembled some
of the major resources for this.
At some point you may have candidate concepts with definitions to provide
to DFT and others.
Is that OK with the WG to proceed on this?
Gary Berg-Cross, Ph.D.
***@***.***
​​

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig] RE: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabri...

Jeremy et al
Yes, your

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
​)​
we had:
"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

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Hi,
I'm one of the researchers that Jeremy contacted yesterday regarding the
definition of the *gatheredInto(x,y)* predicate. I've been reading up on
this discussion and had a question about one of the collection definitions
being maintained by the RDA. Regarding the concept of PID (persistent
identifier) has there been any true consensus on what "persistent" and
"identifier" mean? For instance, would the name Keith be a PID (why?/why
not?).
Also regarding the "precise" collection definition from the collection

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Dear Keith, all,
dear, I had to truncate the subject line, because it got to long during
our debate for the RDA list server. I think this is a really strong
reminder to get settled;-)
Dear Keith, all,
dear, I had to truncate the subject line, because it got to long during
our debate for the RDA list server. I think this is a really strong
reminder to get settled;-)
Am 12.04.2016 um 12:41 schrieb ***@***.***:
>
> Ulrich –
>
>
>

12 Apr 2016

RE: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Ulrich –
Many thanks for this clear explanation. I also enjoy this type of discussion. I have a few points:
You said:
Alternatively we also can say, we omit the possibility of correctness proves and use artificial intelligence. In this case we can just use language and, if really wanted, ontologies.

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Hi Gary, all,
I agree with Thomas: this now tends to become a more and more
philosophical debate - I like this, and we should continue this perhaps
with a beer in Denver. But to shorten the decisions process here let me
assume that an undoubted goal is to setup the foundations to build
automated processes on collections and try to bring it down to a simple
question:
Do we want to be able to prove the correctness of processes on
collections or not. If this is case, we need a mathematical solid

11 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Ulrich
In response to your reductive assumption in:
>To Gary: of course a collection is something different to an ordinary PID
also in my reductionist approach. It is a PID, that points to a very
special kind of DO. My assumption is, that this is sufficient for all
Ulrich
In response to your reductive assumption in:
>To Gary: of course a collection is something different to an ordinary PID
also in my reductionist approach. It is a PID, that points to a very
special kind of DO. My assumption is, that this is sufficient for all

11 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Dear Jeremy, all
here, as far as I can see from a first look, the definition is relying
on the binary predicate /isGatheredInto/(/x/,/y/), which I couldn't find
to be defined at the given location anymore. So one probably cannot use
this as a definition here, without defining how this predicate function
works in all cases.
But the other way around: if one uses my reductionist definition, the
function /isGatheredInto/(/x/,/y/) is almost trivially to define,
because one just looks, whether PID y is contained in the set of PIDs in

Pages