RE: structured bibliographic info for BioMed Central articles now available as RDF

From: Matthew Cockerill <matt_at_biomedcentral.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:06:24 +0100

I wondered about that.

I did some digging around with the RDF concept of a sequence, but then realized that I hadn't really seen it in use, and wondered if that meant that order in RDF can be taken to be significant.

And what I found in the specs seemed to that:

"In RDF serializations order of the properties is not significant.
If a property has multiple values the order of the values may be chosen to be significant."

The latter case is what we are dealing with, so it seems that to explicitly express that it's a sequence, while nice, isn't strictly necessary if people agree (as they seem to) that the order of <dc:creator> properties should be taken as significant.

Matt


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce D'Arcus [mailto:bdarcus_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: 14 September 2005 16:54
> To: general_at_simile.mit.edu
> Subject: Re: structured bibliographic info for BioMed Central articles
> now available as RDF
>
>
> Matthew Cockerill wrote:
>
> > Comments/thoughts/suggestions for improvement would be welcome.
>
> Re: this example:
>
> <dc:creator>Li, Huawei</dc:creator>
> <dc:creator>Corrales, Carleton E</dc:creator>
> <dc:creator>Wang, Zhengmin</dc:creator>
> <dc:creator>Zhao, Yanling</dc:creator>
> <dc:creator>Wang, Yucheng</dc:creator>
> <dc:creator>Liu, Hong</dc:creator>
> <dc:creator>Heller, Stefan</dc:creator>
>
> Scholarly contributions are typically ordered (e.g. think of "first
> author", etc.), so perhaps those ought to be grouped as a sequence?
>
> Bruce
>
This email has been scanned by Postini.
For more information please visit http://www.postini.com

Received on Wed Sep 14 2005 - 16:05:41 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Aug 09 2012 - 16:39:18 EDT