Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Property hasInvolvement is required, clean-up around Involvement #359

Open
JuergenGrupp opened this issue Oct 8, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@JuergenGrupp
Copy link
Collaborator

JuergenGrupp commented Oct 8, 2024

The class Involvement is referenced from EditorialObject via hasContributor or hasPublisher or hasCreator . While the latter two (hasPublisher, hasCreator) are relicts from the time before Involvement did exist and both pointed to Agent, the first (hasContributor) was introduced, when the class Involvement was still named Role.
Proposed changes:

  • For the current modelling, the property that links EditorialObject and ProductionJob to Involvement should be named hasInvolvement according to our naming conventions.

  • hasCreator should be kept as property of Annotation , but it should link to Agent , not to Involvement , as it currently does.

  • hasPublisher should be removed, as it is fully replaced by an Involvement classified as a publisher.

@RendersKoen
Copy link

RendersKoen commented Dec 1, 2024

Hi @juergen, is there also an inverse property planned? Would it be called isInvolvementIn then?

@JuergenGrupp
Copy link
Collaborator Author

JuergenGrupp commented Dec 2, 2024

Good question, thank you @RendersKoen !
I think an inverse property would make sense, as it underpins the notion of Involvement as an entity in its own right.
The name could be isInvolvementIn as you suggested is a good candidate, but isInvolvementFor, isInvolvedIn, hasEditorialObject or relatesTo would be options, too. The EditorialCommittee will discuss and propose.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants