[open-bibliography] New BNB sample data available

Mon Feb 7 17:16:25 UTC 2011

Jeff, these seem to be different schemes, not different prefLabels.  
They've been given equivalence, but have different identifiers. My  
point is that prefLabel choice is not just a question of language, but  
language is the only option we have to creating different prefLabels  
for the same identified concept.

kc

Quoting "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung at oclc.org>:

> In SKOS, different communities can have their own prefLabels for the
> same concept like so:
>
> mesh:abc a skos:Concept ;
> 	skos:inScheme mesh:scheme ;
> 	skos:exactMatch lcsh:xyz ;
> 	skos:prefLabel "the established MESH heading" .
>
> lcsh:xyz a skos:Concept ;
> 	skos:inScheme lcsh:scheme ;
> 	skos:exactMatch mesh:abc ;
> 	skos:prefLabel "the established LCSH heading" .
>
> Jeff
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-lld-request at w3.org [mailto:public-lld-request at w3.org] On
>> Behalf Of Karen Coyle
>> Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 11:02 AM
>> To: Simon Spero
>> Cc: open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org; public-lld
>> Subject: Re: New BNB sample data available
>>
>> Quoting Simon Spero <sesuncedu at gmail.com>:
>>
>>
>> > In regards to the requirement that preflabel must be unique within a
>> scheme,
>> > this is an essential property of controlled vocabularies (ambiguity
>> > control).  See e.g. NISO Z39.19 section 5.3.1 (not sure what the
>> paragraph
>> > number is in 2788, but it's roughly the same wording).
>> >
>> > It's been LC policy since 1876 :-) [Cutter rule # 173].
>>
>> Right, but the context of that rule is a thesaurus or controlled
>> vocabulary in which the "prefLabel" *is* the identifier for the
>> "thing." There were no URIs in 1876. FRAD continues this by
>> essentially having two identifiers -- one for machines (URI) and one
>> for humans (prefLabel). This makes sense, to some degree, because you
>> do want to communicate unambiguously to both machines and humans, but
>> I'm not totally convinced that prefLabel is the way to do that, since
>> different communities are likely to favor different prefLabels. (Think
>> of the difference between MeSH subject headings and LCSH subject
>> headings for the same thing.) Communicating to humans unambiguously is
>> devilishly hard, as we know.
>>
>> kc
>>
>> >
>> > Simon
>> > p.s.
>> > Amusingly, Z39.19 uses the term polyseme polysemously to mean
>> homonym.
>> > Lexical semantics meta!
>> > On Feb 6, 2011 8:57 AM, "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac at few.vu.nl> wrote:
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Karen Coyle
>> kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet