tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post6993298647707854283..comments2023-04-15T11:42:35.385-04:00Comments on Go To Hellman: RDF Properties on Magic ShelvesErichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14172740163003223132noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-28030109187114209542009-12-28T19:03:26.887-05:002009-12-28T19:03:26.887-05:00Thanks for the comment Martha!
I think the answer...Thanks for the comment Martha!<br /><br />I think the answer is that there are a number of ways to model the effect-of-water-pollution-on-fish subject relationship in an RDF model. I would lean towards saying 'work A has-subject (water pollution has-effect-on fish)' where the part in parentheses is reified either explicitly or implicitly as part of an ontology describing effects.<br /><br />It's actually a good example of something that's awkward in a classical flat taxonomy; LCSH becomes horrific for computers when it tries to do this.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14172740163003223132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-36543854811353079112009-12-23T13:58:34.105-05:002009-12-23T13:58:34.105-05:00Thank you so much, Eric, for this explanation; I’m...Thank you so much, Eric, for this explanation; I’m feeling a little dizzy (smile), but I will keep ruminating and perhaps it will clear up over time. In the mean time, I have a new and more complicated (I think?) example for you. How would you model the following? <br /><br />In my model, work is a class and concept is a class, but the subject relationship between the work and the concept is a property. I felt I had to do this because a work can have a subject relationship with a person (a book about Shakespeare) or another work (a book about Hamlet) (person and work are all classes) as well as with a concept or an object. However, a work can have a subject relationship with more than one concept or object and it would be helpful if we could specify what the relationship is between the two or more concepts or objects the work is about. An example would be a book on the effect of water pollution on fish. You could just create a subject relationship between water pollution (concept) and the work and another subject relationship between fish (object) and the work, but the subject access you provide your users would be richer if you could say that the relationship between water pollution and fish was an ‘effect on’ relationship. Am I right in thinking that we need the relationship property ‘has-subject’ as in ‘work A has-subject water pollution’ and ‘work A has-subject fish’ and then that relationship property needs to have the property ‘subject-to-subject-relationship-effect-on?’ Can you see a simpler way to model this in RDF? Or are we pushing the limits of RDF and demonstrating that perhaps it is not the best vehicle for our data?<br /><br />By the way, I take your point about distinguishing between a class and a class instance. There are lots of books that are about the effect of one thing on another. Because this pattern exists, would it not be wise to create a relationship property in the model to accommodate it?Martha M. Yeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12770562819222756261noreply@blogger.com