Supplemental: Re: [osis-core] type on identifier and subject, syntax of content

[Patrick Durusau]

Chris,

The problem, as I have tried to state both in prose and on the phone is 
as follows:

Troy has correctly stated to me that in an earlier version that we 
priviledged type="OSIS" to have special meaning for OSIS software. OSIS 
software would use that to note the unique "OSIS" name for a text and 
use it to match against others.

#1 is not the the same thing as type when it is ISBN/LCCN, etc.

I really don't understand the objection based upon:

<identifier type="ISBN">3487046881</identifier>

versus

<identifier>ISBN:3487046881</identifier>

If you think those convey different information I would like to hear how 
it differs?

See further responses below:

Chris Little wrote:
> I don't think I understand what purpose type serves on <identifier> if 
> we're going to constrain it to be either "OSIS" or semantically vacuous.
> 
> I really don't understand the purpose of the prefix proposed as part of 
> the content of identifier/subject, so I'll just identify some sample 
> usage and you can let me know if it makes sense or correct me if not....
> 
> Take, for example, the book "The Apostolic Fathers" by JB Lightfoot. 
> (You can follow along with me at catlog.loc.gov using the LCCN 
> 73173713.)  I should have (IMO) the following:
> 
> <identifier 
> type="OSIS">private:Monograph.Lightfoot_JB.Apostolic_Fathers</identifier>
> <identifier type="LCCN">73173713</identifier>
> <identifier type="ISBN">3487046881</identifier>
> <identifier type="LCCall">BR60.A62 L5213 1973</identifier>
> <subject type="Dewey">270.1 20</identifier>
> <subject type="LCSH">Christian literature, Early.</identifier>
> 
> I'm fine with the prefix in cases like my type="OSIS" identifier above. 
>  There, I'm essentially identifying a work ID, and using "ccl:" to say 
> that this is the work ID that _I_ claim.  This could be replaced with 
> prefixes from groups who want to act as naming authorities if they 
> should become established.
> 

Sorry, I missed the use of "ccl:" in your example.

Are you saying if I have type="OSIS" I should have:

<identifier type="OSIS">ISBN:3487046881</identifier>?

That puts the type in the prefix, which for some unknown reason is not 
acceptable, but looks to me to be required if type="OSIS" has taken up 
the type attribute value.

That is the crux of problem.

If type were not allowed to be OSIS, that is to say we had some other 
attribute, osisTextID (true/false) and type really was type, i.e., 
ISBN/LCCN/LCCall, then we would be separating out the use of OSIS on 
type to mean this is my OSIS identifier, which is different from saying 
this is the type of my identifier.

So, either we give up on the dual use of type to mean OSIS identifier 
and type of the identifier (as in a standard type) or we have to do 
something odd like has been proposed.

Either way, I think the prefix or attribute value for type, should be 
enumerated, defined in a work element, or private (with or without 
colon, depending on the solution).

I will type up a suggestion and see where that takes us.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick


>  From Todd's message....
> 
>> Either 1) type="ISBN" plays no role in interpreting the system of 
>> identifiers
>> that the body of <identifier> comes from AND a prefix is required
>> OR 2) type="ISBN" acts in the role of a work prefix and a work prefix is
>> not necessary
>>
>> In case #1, the type attribute only serves as a guide but does NOT add
>> to the interpretation of the value in the body of <identifier>.
>>
>> In case #2, the type attribute serves two purposes/roles, a work prefix
>> is required in cases where type="OSIS" is used, AND conflicting
>> "contexts" can be encoded (<identifier
>> type="LOC">isbn:123456789</identifier>).
> 
> 
> I have a particular problem with the example at the end here. 
> Identifiers like this aren't of a "type" which should be identified as a 
> naming authority.  ISBN numbers are identifiers of type "ISBN". 
> Similarly, type="OSIS" doesn't really mean that the identifier is 
> registered by BTG, it means it's of the OSIS "type".  That is, it 
> conforms to whatever standards for identifier creation BTG defines.
> 
> Except for identifiers of type "OSIS", the contents of identifier and 
> subject elements are unlikely to bear any resemblance to IDs, osisIDs, 
> or any other ID-like value.  There's no guarantee the won't include 
> colons, and many of them include spaces & other punctuation.  I don't 
> feel there's any good reason to treat them /sort of/ like they're IDs by 
> prepending prefixes.
> 
> They're just strings, and they should be easily parsed and make sense as 
> simple strings without need of stripping prefixes.  I feel we should 
> just be enclosing the data itself (the identifier value) in the 
> <identifier> element--not the identifier plus a prefix.
> 
> --Chris
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> osis-core mailing list
> osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
> http://www.bibletechnologieswg.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-core
> 


-- 
Patrick Durusau
Director of Research and Development
Society of Biblical Literature
Patrick.Durusau@sbl-site.org
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!