Skip to content

Agent that manages a RWO? #40

Open

Description

@azaroth42

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?

Activity

  1. anarchivist commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @anarchivist
    Member

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

  2. azaroth42 commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @azaroth42
    ContributorAuthor

    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.

  3. anarchivist commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @anarchivist
    Member

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

    • dct:provenance (range: dct:ProvenanceStatement)
    • edm:currentLocation (range: edm:Place)
  4. azaroth42 commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @azaroth42
    ContributorAuthor

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

  5. anarchivist commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @anarchivist
    Member

    Agreed. How about dm2e:holdingInstitution?

  6. anarchivist commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @anarchivist
    Member

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

  7. azaroth42 commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @azaroth42
    ContributorAuthor

    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

  8. anarchivist commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @anarchivist
    Member

    Would we prefer DM2E or CRM?

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

  9. azaroth42 commented on Apr 21, 2016

    @azaroth42
    ContributorAuthor

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions