Agent that manages a RWO? - Githubissues

hybox / models

Data Modeling repository for HyBox (ontologies, vocabularies, best practices, requirements, etc)

Apache License 2.0

5 stars 3 forks source link

Agent that manages a RWO? #40

Open azaroth42 opened 8 years ago

azaroth42 commented 8 years ago

Need a predicate for holding institution. E.g. if some agent is the creator, and then donates the object/collection to an institution to look after, but still retains ownership ... what's the relationship between the object and the institution?

It's not the publisher (it could be locked away in a vault, this is the RWO collection, not the digital representation) or the rightsHolder (the creator is still the rights holder), nor a creator nor contributor ... so we're outside of DPLA MAP.

marcrel has:

Repository: An organization that hosts data or material culture objects and provides services to promote long term, consistent and shared use of those data or objects

Which seems pretty much what we want?

anarchivist commented 8 years ago

What is the assumption of the role of the holding institution? Physical custody? Legal ownership? Something else?

azaroth42 commented 8 years ago

I think custody rather than ownership. The institution doesn't necessarily own the objects that it holds, but it does at least have custody of them.

anarchivist commented 8 years ago

A few (not closely considered) options. (also cc @guegueng):

dct:provenance (range: dct:ProvenanceStatement)
edm:currentLocation (range: edm:Place)

azaroth42 commented 8 years ago

I'm not keen on either, as there's no agency involved. A place does not look after an object nor does a Statement.

anarchivist commented 8 years ago

Agreed. How about dm2e:holdingInstitution?

anarchivist commented 8 years ago

(Looking at DM2E, we could also then add dm2e:owner if we had use cases for it.)

azaroth42 commented 8 years ago

I'm happy with domain and range of holdingInstitution. We'd not want to use it on a pcdm:Object (as then it would become a ProvidedCHO) but that's okay.

Would we prefer DM2E or CRM? There's also: crm:P50_has_current_keeper Domain of Physical Thing, range of Actor

anarchivist commented 8 years ago

Would we prefer DM2E or CRM?

Hmm... I lean towards DM2E (because it's opinionated in an EDM direction), but I could be flexible.

azaroth42 commented 8 years ago

I'm cool with DM2E, and we already have an EDM/DPLA baseline so doesn't make sense to stray further than necessary.