Citation property in bibo

[sieh...@googlemail.com]

Hi,

Although the term "citation" is used several times among the bibo
pages it is not used in the sense of a property or relationship (but
on a meta-level to describe a whole dataset described with bibo). Are
there any suggestions, plans, objections etc. to include a citation
property in bibo?

There is a Citation Typing Ontology (cito) - which I do not fully
agree with - that includes the basic relations "cites" and
"isCitedBy": http://imageweb.zoo.ox.ac.uk/pub/2009/citobase/cito-20090505-1.3/cito-content/owldoc/
Could bibo include these or refer to these? More detailed citation
types should not be part of bibo but at least the basic relationship
to connect two bibliographic works.

I added the cito:isCitedBy property to a SeeAlso linkserver so you can
lookup which German Wikipedia articles cite a given work by ISBN:
http://ws.gbv.de/seealso/isbn2wikipedia/3-447-03706-7 does support
content negotiation

Greetings,
Jakob

[Bruce D'Arcus]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 7:24 AM, jakob...@gbv.de
<sieh...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Although the term "citation" is used several times among the bibo
> pages it is not used in the sense of a property or relationship (but
> on a meta-level to describe a whole dataset described with bibo). Are
> there any suggestions, plans, objections etc. to include a citation
> property in bibo?
>
> There is a  Citation Typing Ontology (cito) - which I do not fully
> agree with - that includes the basic relations "cites" and
> "isCitedBy": http://imageweb.zoo.ox.ac.uk/pub/2009/citobase/cito-20090505-1.3/cito-content/owldoc/
> Could bibo include these or refer to these?

It certainly makes to describe these relationships in conjunction with
BIBO. But I don't really know how best to do that. What do you mean
"include these"? Are you suggesting importing those cito properties?

Bruce

[sieh...@googlemail.com]

On 30 Sep., 15:42, "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdar...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > There is a  Citation Typing Ontology (cito) - which I do not fully
> > agree with - that includes the basic relations "cites" and

> > "isCitedBy":http://imageweb.zoo.ox.ac.uk/pub/2009/citobase/cito-20090505-1.3/cito...

> > Could bibo include these or refer to these?
>
> It certainly makes to describe these relationships in conjunction with
> BIBO. But I don't really know how best to do that. What do you mean
> "include these"? Are you suggesting importing those cito properties?

As full cito is just a draft that has not been discussed and used
enough I would not want to import the whole ontology, but we could add
two relations two bibo. The relations are also same as or subtypes of
dcterms:references/isReferencedBy which is not restricted in range an
domain:


@prefix cito: <http://purl.org/net/cito/> .

bibo:cites
rdfs:label "cites"@en ;
rdfs:comment "Relates a document to another document that is cited
by the first document as reference, comment, review, quotation or for
another purpose"@en ;
owl:sameAs cito:cites ;
owl:sameAs dcterms:references ;
rdfs:range bibo:Document ;
rdfs:domain bibo:Document .

bibo:citedBy
rdfs:label "cited by"@en ;
rdfs:comment "Relates a document to another document that cites the
first document."@en ;
owl:sameAs cito:isCitedBy ;
owl:sameAs dcterms:isReferencedBy ;
owl:owl:inverseOf bibo:cited .


We can later add special kind of citation types, for instance "review"
or "comment" but in general citation should mean that one document
explicitely refers to another document.

Jakob

[Bruce D'Arcus]

+1.

Fred, can we add this? Where do we stand with the rest of the stuff
for 1.3?

On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:06 AM, "jakob...@gbv.de" <sieh...@googlemail.com

[Frederick Giasson]

Hi Bruce!

> Fred, can we add this? Where do we stand with the rest of the stuff
> for 1.3?
>

Added locally. We only have to check the legal status stuff, and we will
be ready.

Thanks!

Fred