 |
 |
Mike: For sure dc:relation works, and has some subproperties that a bit more specific, but it's still pretty much a blunt instrument. I know I sound like a broken record, but RDA has a LOT of relationships to choose from--these are the WEMI-to-WEMI relationships: http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/list/schema_id/13.html There are also: RDA Relationships for Persons, Corporate Bodies, Families: http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/list/schema_id/22.html and RDA Relationships for Concepts, Events, Objects, Places: http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/list/schema_id/23.html Diane On 7/7/10 6:42 PM, Mike Taylor wrote: > Isn't that pretty much what dc:relation is for? From > http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#elements-relation > > Label: Relation > Definition: A related resource. > Comment: Recommended best practice is to identify the related resource > by means of a string conforming to a formal identification system. > > > > On 7 July 2010 23:32, Jonathan Rochkind<[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> So in our marc records, we have these 856 links, the meaning of which is >> basically "some web page related to the entity at hand." You don't really >> know the relation, the granularity is not there. >> >> So, fine, data is data, there ought to be some way to model this in standard >> XML/RDF/DC/whatever, right? >> >> It's not dc:identifier, because dc:identifier ends up including all sorts of >> URIs that are not really "web pages" at all, they are just identifiers of >> various kinds. The marc 856s are URI's, it's true, but they really _aren't_ >> URIs given as "identifiers", they do not neccesarily identify the item at >> hand at all, but they DO neccesarily lead to a web page with some "see also" >> relationship to the entity at hand. >> >> So... how would you include this in, say, a DC set in XML or RDF? Is there >> any common way people have done this in the past? >> >> Yeah, I _could_ just expose MODS or MARCXML or what have you. But I'm >> looking for some vocabulary that will handle marc 856s, but also in the >> future handle other "some kind of see also link" from other formats, when I >> add other formats into my corpus. Any ideas? >> >> Jonathan >> >> >> >