Linking a resource (i.e. a book) to i.e.a fulltext PDF, an abstract etc ("enrichment")

Question

Having metadata about books, journals etc. we want to ~~link~~ enrich them, i.e. with their electronic pendant (like a PDF, a HTML, ePub etc.). Which properties can we use for this purpose? We know of:

foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf # useful, but not specific enough
bibo:uri # allows only literals
dct:abstract # summary of the resource. range is missing
dct:hasFormat # range is missing
dct:references # range is missing
dct:tableOfContents # range is missing
mo:wikipedia # linking to wikipedia
mo:review # link to a review

( look up the namespace prefix )

Also interesting is Karen Coyles "Cheat Sheet", listing link relations in FRBR .

Do you know of any more ?

Accepted Answer

I now added a very general property for linking a resource to its online fulltext to lobid vocab: http://lobid.org/vocab/lobid#fulltextOnline

It may be used to directly link a resource to an online fulltext or to link it to a landing page which provides a link to the fulltext. (The problem is that we can't distinguish both cases in the library data we get...)

Here's the description in turtle:

<http://lobid.org/vocab/lobid#fulltextOnline>
   rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty ;
   rdfs:label "has online full text available via"@en ;
   rdfs:comment "Relates a bibliographic resource to an online resource (full text in HTML, PDFs or landing pages in OA repositories, on publishers' websites etc.) that represents the fulltext of the bibliographic resource or contains a link to a full text of the resource. "@en ;
    rdfs:domain [
        a owl:Class ;
        owl:unionOf (<http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Collection>
            <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Document>
        )
    ] ;
    rdfs:range <foaf:Document> .

Answer 2

You'd think it by how hard people go looking for existing properties, but it's not a crime to coin your own properties.

If you're not 100% satisfied with existing properties or you're having intermitable meetings about which one to use, that's a good reason to stop having meetings, make your own up, and move forward with your project.

Note if you or somebody else decides that another property is good for this you can always put this in your T-Box

 :myProperty rdfs:subPropertyOf :someWellKnownProperty .

Answer 3

0

We had a discussion about this over at #swig

link

answered 13 Feb '12, 17:31

brinxmat
1.4k●2●12
accept rate: 15%

Explanation for the down vote?

(14 Feb '12, 03:10) brinxmat

Rurik, I am in need of properties. Content negotiation would not help because my URIs are about things (the book made out of paper). I want to link the description about that book with i.e. an ePub Version, Scan, OCR whatever. (...I have not downvoted)

(14 Feb '12, 05:24) dr0i

Sure, the answer is owl:sameAs, perhaps that got lost in the discussion. Content negotiation was a side issue, unrelated to the specific question asked here. However, I suspect that providing the content negotiation as described adds value to this discussion as well as a uri per thing :)

(14 Feb '12, 06:03) brinxmat

owl:sameAs is NOT ok (if it were so simple ...) because it is NOT the same resource (i.e. a "book of paper" is NOT the same as a "PDF"). I am working for a library organisation, and they are really nitpickicking: if two books are principally the same but are different editions they would not treat them as owl:sameAs ... they take a bearing of frbr).

(14 Feb '12, 11:20) dr0i

Nitpicking about AACR2/RDA & FRBR doesn't equate to nitpicking about data. In any case, since cataloguing is still based on book-in-hand practice, you can safely that each record actually represents a real thing. Represent each subsequent "version" (pdf, epub) as a new URI, link these to a standard title object (not a derived Work-Expression-Manifestation chain) and then use owl:sameAs to link between the "identical" representations (pdf, epub, paper, rdf) of the URIs for each item (which magically becomes a "manifestation"). If you get different editions, link to the standard title.

(14 Feb '12, 17:07) brinxmat

Answer 4

General enrichment is too fuzzy to find a property but rdfs:seeAlso. But if the "i.e. with their electronic pendant" in your question is crucial, I would answer it the following way:

Let <D> be an an URI for an abstract document, i.e. a books, a journal, etc. and <U> the URL of an electronic copy of the document. You may further want to distinguish HTML pages that show an abstract and a "download" link to a PDF, direct links to PDF, or full HTML documents. The OAI-ORE model may help to model this distinctions, but I doubt that in this case it gives more benefit than problems.

I'd model <D> as bibo:Document, but what kind of resource is <U>? I wrote about modeling library documents before, so I'd say that <U> is also a document, but a document which is also a single copy or item. The relationship between <D> and <U> is similar to the relationship beetween <D> and some physical copy of <D>. In lack of a direct property I crafted one in the DAIA ontology. You can use it this way:

<D> a bibo:Document ; # and for instance a bibo:Book
    daia:exemplar <U> .
<U> a bibo:Document, frbr:Item ;
    daia:exemplarOf <D> .

The question whether frbr:item is the right choice or you need to create another class daia:Item may still be discussed. The answer depends on how much you value the exclusion rules of FRBR ontology.

Linking a resource (i.e. a book) to i.e.a fulltext PDF, an abstract etc ("enrichment")

Follow this question

Upcoming Events

Related questions