I can't address the first points, but I can speak a bit to the question 
of meaningful URIs. In the original creation of the RDA elements, 
"meaningful" URIs were used based on the actual RDA terminology. This 
resulted in URIs like:


Not only that, the terminology for some elements changed over time, 
which in some cases meant deprecating a property that was then overly 
confusing based on its name.

Now, I agree that one possibility would have been for the JSC to develop 
meaningful but reasonably short property names. Another possibility is 
that we cease looking at URIs and begin to work with labels, since URIs 
are for machines and labels are for humans. Unfortunately, much RDF 
software still expects you to work with the underlying URI rather than 
the human-facing label. We need to get through that stage as quickly as 
possible, because it's causing us to put effort into URI "naming" that 
would be best used for other analysis activities.


On 1/22/14, 9:57 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
> I'm still pretty new at this linked data thing, but I find it strange
> that RDA element properties URIs such as
> and
> both return the same HTML
> page in a browser. Would it not have been more usable if the
> properties used hash-URIs that could have located the particular
> property on the particular page (e.g.
> Also, a plain "curl" request returns Content-type:
> application/octet-stream -- but it's pretty clearly Turtle, so I think
> that should be Content-type: text/turtle
> I would have liked to see more meaningful URIs--like
> instead of
> meaningful URIs seem a
> lot more approachable to this non-machine, but I guess that would have
> been a lot more work.
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Diane Hillmann
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Folks:
>> I hope this announcement will be of general interest (and apologies if you
>> receive more than one).
>> Diane
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: JSC Secretary <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:23 AM
>> Subject: [rules] Publication of the RDA Element Vocabularies
>> <snip recipients>
>> RDA colleagues,
>> See the announcement below, also posted on the JSC website.  Feel free to
>> share this information with your colleagues.
>> Regards, Judy Kuhagen
>> = = = = =
>> The Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC), Metadata
>> Management Associates, and ALA Publishing (on behalf of the co-publishers
>> of RDA) are pleased to announce that the RDA elements and relationship
>> designators have been published in the Open Metadata Registry (OMR) as
>> Resource Description Framework (RDF) element sets suitable for linked data
>> and semantic Web applications.
>> The elements include versions "unconstrained" by Functional Requirements
>> for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority
>> Data (FRAD), the standard library models underpinning RDA, that are
>> intended for use in applications by non-RDA communities.
>> The published version of the RDA element sets builds on several years of
>> work by the DCMI/RDA Task Group. Earlier versions developed by the Group
>> will remain available, but will be deprecated for further development and
>> use, and redirected to the new version.
>> Gordon Dunsire, Chair of the JSC, said "The RDA element set is a
>> distillation of modern approaches to resource discovery supporting rich
>> descriptions of library and cultural heritage materials and detailed
>> relationships between them at international level. The JSC has recently
>> established a working group to assist in extending and refining the RDA
>> elements, and hopes that they will be useful to other communities, ranging
>> from close neighbours in library linked data to the global networks of
>> general search."
>> Diane Hillmann of Metadata Management Associates said "We are extremely
>> pleased to be able to make this new version available now in fully
>> published form, ready for implementation by libraries and vendors. We look
>> forward to discussing the important features available in this version with
>> our colleagues at the upcoming ALA Midwinter meetings and beyond."
>> James Hennelly, Managing Editor of RDA Toolkit, said "This is an important
>> update to the RDA Registry and a crucial step in the advancement of RDA's
>> mission to be a standard that is accessible to both cataloging
>> professionals, through the toolkit and print and ebook publications, and to
>> application developers seeking to make use of library data, through the
>> Registry's expression of the RDA elements and vocabularies."
>> The basic RDA element set namespace is and it contains a
>> total of over 1600 properties and classes. Elements are distributed in sets
>> (the number of elements in each set is given in brackets):
>> Agent properties
>> []<>(226)
>> Expression properties
>> []<>(236)
>> Item properties
>> []<>(54)
>> Manifestation properties
>> []<>(213)
>> Work properties
>> []<>(232)
>> Unconstrained properties
>> []<>(698)
>> Classes []<>(8)
>> Follow the links to see details of each element set.
>> Questions or comments on the content of the element sets may be addressed
>> to the Chair of the JSC, Gordon Dunsire [[log in to unmask]]. Questions
>> and comments on the encoding of the vocabularies or on the Open Metadata
>> Registry may be addressed to Diane Hillmann [[log in to unmask]].

Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask]
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet