On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 8:24 AM, Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 4 May 2010 13:19, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Having read the rest of this thread, I find that nothing that's been
>>> said changes my initial gut reaction on reading this question: DO NOT
>>> USE DCTERMS.  It's vocabulary is Just Plain Inadequate, and not only
>>> for esoteric cases like the Alternative Chronological Designation of
>>> First Issue or Part of Sequence field that Karen mentioned.  Despite
>>> having 70 (seventy!) elements, it's lacking fundamental fields for
>>> describing articles in journals -- there are no journalTitle, volume,
>>> issue, startPage or endPage fields.  That, for me, is a deal-breaker.
>>
>> If you're using Dublin Core as XML, I agree with this.  If you're
>> using Dublin Core as RDF (which is, honestly, the only thing it's
>> really good for), this is a non-issue.
>
> Oh, what is the solution when using it in RDF?
>
In RDF, you can pull in predicates from other namespaces, where the
attributes you're looking for may be defined. What's nice about this
is that works sort of like how namespaces are *supposed* to work in
XML:  that is, an agent that comes along and grabs your triples will
parse the assertions from vocabularies it understands and ignore those
it doesn't.

 So in your particular case, it would look like:

@prefix rdf:     <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>.
@prefix dcterms:  <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
@prefix bibo: <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/>.
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer>.
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/>.

<_:article1>
    rdf:type bibo:AcademicArticle;
    dcterms:title "AN UNUSUAL NEW NEOSAUROPOD DINOSAUR FROM THE LOWER
CRETACEOUS HASTINGS BEDS GROUP OF EAST SUSSEX, ENGLAND"@en;
    dcterms:creator <_:author1>, <_:author2>;
    dcterms:abstract """Xenoposeidon proneneukos gen. et sp. nov. is a
neosauropod represented by BMNH R2095, a well-preserved partial
mid-to-posterior dorsal vertebra from the Berriasian-Valanginian
Hastings Beds Group of Ecclesbourne Glen, East Sussex, England. It was
briefly described by Lydekker in 1893, but it has subsequently been
overlooked. This specimen's concave cotyle, large lateral pneumatic
fossae, complex system of bony laminae and camerate internal structure
show that it represents a neosauropod dinosaur. However, it differs
from all other sauropods in the form of its neural arch, which is
taller than the centrum, covers the entire dorsal surface of the
centrum, has its posterior margin continuous with that of the cotyle,
and slopes forward at 35 degrees relative to the vertical. Also unique
is a broad, flat area of featureless bone on the lateral face of the
arch; the accessory infraparapophyseal and postzygapophyseal laminae
which meet in a V; and the asymmetric neural canal, small and round
posteriorly but large and teardrop-shaped anteriorly, bounded by
arched supporting laminae. The specimen cannot be referred to any
known sauropod genus, and clearly represents a new genus and possibly
a new `family'. Other sauropod remains from the Hastings Beds Group
represent basal Titanosauriformes, Titanosauria and Diplodocidae; X.
proneneukos may bring to four the number of sauropod `families'
represented in this unit. Sauropods may in general have been much less
morphologically conservative than is usually assumed. Since
neurocentral fusion is complete in R2095, it is probably from a mature
or nearly mature animal. Nevertheless, size comparisons of R2095 with
corresponding vertebrae in the Brachiosaurus brancai holotype HMN SII
and Diplodocus carnegii holotype CM 84 suggest a rather small
sauropod: perhaps 15 m long and 7600 kg in mass if built like a
brachiosaurid, or 20 m and 2800 kg if built like a diplodocid."""@en;
    dcterms:subject
<http://id.loc.gov/authorities/sh85038094#concept>,
<http://id.loc.gov/authorities/sh85117730#concept>,
<http://id.loc.gov/authorities/sh85097127#concept>;
    dcterms:isPartOf <_:journal1>;
    bibo:volume "50"^^xsd:integer;
    bibo:issue "6"^^xsd:integer;
    bibo:numPages "18"^^xsd:integer;
    bibo:pages "1547-1564";
    bibo:pageStart "1547"^^xsd:integer;
    bibo:pageEnd "1564"^^xsd:integer;
    dcterms:issued "2007-11"^^xsd:date;
    dcterms:language <http://purl.org/NET/marccodes/languages/eng#lang>;
    bibo:authorList ( <_:author1> <_:author2> );
    bibo:doi "10.1111/j.1475-4983.2007.00728.x".

<_:journal1>
    rdf:type bibo:Journal;
    dcterms:title "Palaeontology";
    bibo:issn "0031-0239";
    foaf:homepage
<http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118531917/home?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0>;
    dcterms:publisher <_:publisher1>.

<_:publisher1>
    rdf:type foaf:Organization;
    foaf:name "Blackwell Publishing";
    foaf:homepage <http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/>;
    dcterms:isPartOf <_:publisher2>.
<_:publisher2>
    rdf:type foaf:Organization;
    foaf:name "Wiley-Blackwell";
    foaf:homepage <http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Brand/id-35.html>;
    dcterms:isPartOf <_:publisher3>.
<_:publisher3>
    rdf:type foaf:Organization;
    foaf:name "John Wiley & Sons, Inc.";
    foaf:name "Wiley";
    foaf:homepage <http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/>.

<_:author1>
    rdf:type foaf:Person;
    foaf:name "Michael Taylor";
    foaf:givenName "Michael";
    foaf:familyName "Taylor";
    foaf:homepage <http://miketaylor.org.uk/>;
    foaf:depiction
<http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/xeno/images/photos/DINO_4.jpeg>;
    foaf:topic_interest <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Paleontology>,
<http://id.loc.gov/authorities/sh85066163#concept>;
    foaf:made <_:article1>.

<_:author2>
    rdf:type foaf:Person;
    foaf:name "Darren Naish";
    foaf:givenName "Darren";
    foaf:familyName "Naish";
    foaf:homepage <http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/>;
    foaf:depiction
<http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/Naish_profile_70_px.jpg>;
    foaf:topic_interest <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Tetrapod>,
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Paleontology>;
    foaf:made <_:article1>.

So an agent that comes along that doesn't know anything about
Bibliontology still can get the gist of what your article is about and
make some decisions on its value.  An agent that actually cares about
real citation information would probably know how to speak BIBO, so it
would be able to glean more information from the graph.

-Ross.