cklee / ecpo Goto Github PK

It's a technical term so it must be defined and explained anyway - how about epco:Chronology?

Maybe the use of more general terms for volume and issue is advisable?
Volume -> Unit, Issue -> Item?

hasBeginUnitCaption e.g. "Volume"
hasBeginUnitNumbering
hasBeginUnitExtension
hasBeginItemCaption e.g. "Issue"
hasBeginItemNumbering
hasBeginItemExtension
...

A diagram helps to better grasp the ontology. See SSSO for an example.

See related ontologies for start/end time. Maybe one could use one of these as super-properties for hasStart and hasEnd. The timeline ontology also seems to fit.

I don't understand the need for hasBestandsverlaufOpen. One could also use hasBestandsverlauf without end date (?).

How would one interprete a Bestandsverlauf that is connectd with hasBestandsverlaufOpen but it also has an end with hasEndXXX? The ontology should better not allow such cases or make them impossible.

Other other alternatives:

• subclass UnendedBestandsverlauf that must not have an End
• special instance "Running" which is connected to a Bestandsverlauf as current end date.
• ...

To allow queries for running Bestandsverläufe (Bestandsverlauf without an ending group) a new property ecpo:hasBesatndsverlaufNoEnding oder ecpo:hasBestandsverlaufOpen should be added.

Why are Cronologies connected to Items rather than Documents?

I tried to model a volume of a book series (wrongly):

$series a bibo:Periodical ;
  ecpo:hasChronology [
    a ecpo:CurrentChronology ;
    ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "1"
  ] ;
  dcterms:hasPart $volume1, $volume2 . # ...

$volume1 a bibo:book ; dcterms:isPartOf $series .
# $volume2, ...

$volume1 holding:exemplar $mylocalcopy .
$volume1 holding:exemplar $librarycopyofvolume1 .
$volume1 holding:broaderExemplar $librarycopyofthefullseries .
$series holding:exemplar $librarycopyofthefullseries .

$librarycopyofvolume1 dcterms:isPartOf $librarycopyofthefullseries .

Then I realized that the same book series could be held with different chronologies at different libraries. This reason could be made more clear in the specification. So the right model is:

$series a bibo:Periodical ;
  dcterms:hasPart $volume1, $volume2 . # ...

$volume1 a bibo:book ; dcterms:isPartOf $series .
# $volume2, ...

$volume1 holding:exemplar $mylocalcopy .
$volume1 holding:exemplar $librarycopyofvolume1 .
$volume1 holding:broaderExemplar $librarycopyofthefullseries .
$series holding:exemplar $librarycopyofthefullseries .

# The library has the full series, beginning with volume 1
$librarycopyofthefullseries ecpo:hasChronology [
    a ecpo:CurrentChronology ;
    ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "1"
  ] ;

$librarycopyofvolume1 dcterms:isPartOf $librarycopyofthefullseries .

# I only have a copy of volume 1 and 2 of the series
$mylocalcopy dcterms:isPartOf $mylocalcopyoftheseries .

$mylocalcopyoftheseries holding:exemplarOf $series ;
   a ecpo:ClosedChronology ;
    ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "1"
    ecpo:hasEndVolumeNumbering "2"
  ] ;

With using dct:hasPart it is not clear how a list oft Chronologies is ordered.

Order is unclear:

:item ecpo:hasChronology [
    a ecpo:CurrentChronology ;
    dct:hasPart [
        a ecpo:ClosedChronology ;
        ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "5" ;
    ] , [
        a ecpo:ClosedChronology ;
        ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "8" ;
    ]
]

Possible use the Ordered List Ontology (needs a new property ecpo:hasChronologyList):

:item ecpo:hasChronologyList [
    a olo:OrderedList ;
    olo:length 2 ;
    olo:slot [
        olo:index 1 ;
        olo:item [
            a ecpo:ClosedChronology ;
            ecpo:hasBeginVolumeCaption "v." ;
            ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "5" ;
            ecpo:hasBeginIssueCaption "no." ;
            ecpo:hasBeginIssueNumbering "1" ;
            ecpo:hasBeginTemporal "1975" ;
            ecpo:hasBeginTemporalExtension "spring" ;
            ecpo:hasEndVolumeCaption "v." ;
            ecpo:hasEndVolumeNumbering "7" ;
            ecpo:hasEndIssueCaption "no." ;
            ecpo:hasEndIssueNumbering "4" ;
            ecpo:hasEndTemporal "1977" ;
            ecpo:hasEndTemporalExtension "autumn"
        ]
    ] ;
    olo:slot [
        olo:index 2 ;
        olo:item [
            a ecpo:ClosedChronology ;
            ecpo:hasBeginVolumeCaption "v." ;
            ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "8" ;
            ecpo:hasBeginIssueCaption "no." ;
            ecpo:hasBeginIssueNumbering "2" ;
            ecpo:hasBeginTemporal "1978" ;
            ecpo:hasBeginTemporalExtension "winter"
        ]
    ]
] .

Possible extend rdf:Seq:

ecpo:hasPart rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:li;
    rdfs:range ecpo:Chronology;
    rdfs:domain ecpo:ChronologyList .

ecpo:ChronologyList a owl:Class;
owl:equivalentClass
[ a owl:Class;
    owl:intersectionOf
      ( rdf:Seq
        [a owl:Restriction;
         owl:onProperty ecpo:hasPart;
         owl:someValuesFrom owl:Thing ]) ] .

:item ecpo:hasChronologyList [
    ecpo:hasPart  [
        a ecpo:ClosedChronology ;
        ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "5" ;
    ] , [
        a ecpo:ClosedChronology ;
        ecpo:hasBeginVolumeNumbering "8" ;
    ]

The document says: "Ranges of periodical units are described by beginning and ending groups" without further defining this groups. The terms are also referred to later. As I understand, the beginning group of a chronology $X is the set of all literals $Y with $X ecpo:hasBegin $Y, right?

Hi,
for the annual review of the vocabulary in LOV, it would be great to add versionInfo and modified date in the ontology. TIA.

The intended scope of the ontology is not clear. That is, which bibliographic entities is it meant for, and are there entities to which it cannot be applied?

Current library cataloging rules (Resource Description and Access) define three cases:
single unit: a resource that is issued either as a single physical unit (e.g., as a single-volume monograph) or, in the case of an intangible resource, as a single logical unit (e.g., as a PDF file mounted on the web);
multipart monograph: a resource issued in two or more parts (either simultaneously or successively) that is complete or intended to be completed within a finite number of parts (e.g., a dictionary in two volumes, three audiocassettes issued as a set);
serial: a resource issued in successive parts, usually having numbering, that has no predetermined conclusion (e.g., a periodical, a monographic series, a newspaper).

By using the term "periodicals" you seem to imply that you are scoping the ontology to a subset of serials. Perhaps you use "periodicals" as a synonym for "serials".

Multipart monographs have the same needs as serials for description of enumeration and chronology. Are they in scope for the ontology or not?

Please clarify the scope of the ontology in the Introduction.