About the model: Question 18
December 2, 2007 comment from Bruce D’Arcus: …Also, there’s a general principle in RDF that favors reuse and extension over reinvention. There shouldn’t be a need for anyone to invent another frbr:Work, frbr:expression, frbr:Person, etc. You can reuse them, including subclassing them (likewise with properties). …
December 4, 2007 comment from Martha: The fact that FRBR maps nearly all of the bibliographic description to manifestation and that the tables at the back of FRBR do not actually correspond to the entity definitions in the text makes me reluctant to simply reuse frbr:work.
Question: would using the FRBR entities as defined in Bruce’s FRBR/RDF model imply using the FRBR tables that link all elements of the bibliographic description to manifestation?
December 11, 2007 posting to NGC4LIB list by Jonathan Rochkind: Martha Yee wrote:> what are the implications of reusing the FRBR work/expression/manifestation entity definitions? >Would that not imply reusing the entity mapping of bibliographic elements that are part of the >FRBR RDF expression?I think you are more-or-less right, but I also think that it is not surprising you are finding deficiencies in the existing FRBR definitions, because the existing FRBR definitions have not been worked on sufficiently. The work you are doing is very important as one aspect of actually testing what’s there for FRBR–something that hasn’t really been done.
December 13 email from Jonathan Rochkind asking for permission to post the above at the blog:
Certainly, anything I post in public you can feel free to do what you like with. 🙂 Later replies to that thread make me think that I was wrong about the relation of the “entity definitions” we are talking about, and the FRBR “central committee”, since it seems like they didn’t come from FRBR itself anyway. But the general point that FRBR is just a starting point and we are sure to find errors in it at present, I certainly stand behind.
DECISION: Just to stay on the conservative side, I have kept the ycr classes rather than referring to the frbr ones.