small emendation proposal

[eroux]

• bdo:eventText could be replaced with a note or an rdfs:comment associated with the event
• dkarChag title should be replaced with ToCTitle

[eroux]

• workCatalogInfo is a bit ambiguous and seems to be used mostly to indicate a very short summary of the work... perhaps it should be renamed to workSummary?
• workErrata could be migrated to a new type of note, and should have a more explicit commentary, the usage is not clear (is it an errata about the scanning process? an errata indicated in the original? in a reproduction? a general comment?)
• workIllustrations should probably not be migrated (values are mostly "ill." which is pretty uninformative)
• workLocationStatement could disappear and we could have :

bdr:foo :workLocation [ a :WorkLocation ;
    rdfs:label "foo!"@en ;
    ...
]

instead of

bdr:foo :workLocationStatement "foo!"@en ;

• workPartLabel should be migrated to something else (or maybe not at all)
• workPrintery as a string should be migrated in a kind of note
• do we really need workIsNumbered?? (we already have a property for the number)
• workSourceNote: what's that?

[xristy]

@eroux here are some comments:

• dkarChag ==> ToC - +1, you've already fixed
• workSourceNote - occurs 162 times and is supposed to be a comment on the source of the object that was digitized, e.g., "impression from blocks of the original tibetan xylograph"@en or "reproduced from a rare manuscript from Glang-'phrang in nepal"@en. It does not appear to have been consistently or frequently used. Needs review by librarians.
• workIsNumbered - not needed IF we ensure that workSeriesNumber indicates "number not known" when the Work is known to be part of a numbered series but for some reason that number is not known; otherwise, it would seem superfluous. There are 20 occurrences of workIsNumbered without an accompanying workSeriesNumber.
• workLocationStatement - change to rdfs:comment in a WorkLocation as you suggest.
• workErrata - the 37 occurrences are a grab bag of different sorts of information which could be split into distinct kinds of comments or discarded. Needs review by librarians.
• workIllustrations - the 1813 occurrences indicate that the Work has some sort of illustrations, sometimes indicating that color plates or portraits and such are present
• workPartLabel - is the name or title of a section of a work in the outline and could be migrated as workTitle of type WorkBibliographicalTitle

• workCatalogInfo - I'm not sure that a name change is warranted. The Manual says:

  Phrase that contains pertinent information about the type of work, its contents, and authorship with dates if available in parenthesis (ex: 1904-1969)

  many of the 14,374 occurrences are not simple summaries. Perhaps we want to allow for separate commentarial forms

• eventText - the 937 occurrences could be replaced with rdfs:comment or a subproperty of rdfs:comment

I'm thinking that using subproperties of rdfs:comment may be helpful even when the comment is contextualized by being a property of a named blank node, such as a :WorkLocation. It reduces ambiguity.

[eroux]

Ok yes I agree with the subprops of rdfs:comment, the dkarchak -> toc has been changed in the ontology but not in xmltold.

The workpartlabel should be migrated to a proper label+title yes, but would that require a new node for the section? In other words, is that the title of a work or of its section?

Let's proceed as you suggest, thanks