Representing bibliographic identifiers in RDF
Adrian Pohl
I posted a question[1] on semanticoverflow whether to use predicates
or xsd datatypes to represent different bibliographic identifiers in
RDF. It would be great if you could contribute your thoughts to this
question and why Bibo chose the approach of creating properties for
each identifier.
In the context of these identifier questions, I realized that Bibo
doesn't differ between identifiers for a bibliographic resource (like
ASIN, DOI, ISBN, handle etc.) and identifiers for bibliographic
records (like OCLC number or LCCN). In Bibo, these are all
subproperties of bibo:identifier whose domain is bibo:Collection or
bibo:Document. If you consider that identifiers for library catalogs
identify the record, this isn't correct.
Am I just nitpicking? Or should the distinction between record and
bibliographic resource actually be taken into account? Usually the LOD
community attaches some importance to the distinction between an
entity and its description and I think for the purposes of our project
it might also be important...
Adrian
[1] http://www.semanticoverflow.com/questions/3572/xsd-or-vocabulary