[libdb-develop] Group 1 Entities Mapped To SQL; Comments Please

[Morbus I. <mo...@di...>]

Hey there. I've recently committed the first "proper" draft of Group 1
entities and some sample data to go along with it, to CVS. To recap, FRBR
Group 1 covers work, expressions, manifestations, and items.

I need comments. I'll be starting Group 2 (person and corporate body,
probably the most time consuming of this process) sometime tomorrow.
If you don't have CVS set up on your machine, you can view the two
files through the following URL:

 http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/libdb/LibDB/databases/

You should be looking at Rev 1.5 (which should be there shortly,
compensating for the lag of the web cvs servers). mysql_sample.sql
is a "real world" mapping of piss-poor movie THE POOL, and
mysql_schema.sql is the database schema that describes it.

For now, ignore the ?DatabaseSchema documentation that is on the
wiki. It is a day out of date, which is a lot more than you think.
I'll be updating it once I get these two files complete with
Group 2 and Group 3 entities.

Some specific areas to look at are the relationships defined.
In the current schema, there are (way at the bottom), six
relationships defined; three come from FRBR and are
well-defined:

  $work           is realized through    $expression
  $expression     is a realization of    $work

  $expression     is embodied in         $manifestation
  $manifestation  is an embodiment of    $expression

  $manifestation  is exemplified by      $item
  $item           is an exemplar of      $manifestation

You can tell this is a hierarchy. However, three relationships
were defined explicitly by me to cover some of the attributes
of the various entities above. That's what I need sanity
checking on (both in the terms used to link the relationship,
and in the actual SQL implementation and layout):

  $entity	  is also named		 $name
  $name           is a variant name of   $entity

  $entity         is summarized with     $annotation
  $annotation     is a summarization of  $entity

  $annotation     is summarized by         $entity
  $entity         is a summarization from  $entity

The last two relationships can be used validly to say:

 "THE POOL is summarized with [this annotation]";
  "[This annotation] is summarized by [this author]";

but, in the sample data, the summarization actually comes
from the back of the DVD. So, in essence, another example is:

 "THE POOL is summarized with [this annotation]";
 "[This annotation] is summarized by [the DVD manifestation]";

Thoughts on that? Don't hesitate to ask questions. I'm also
posting this to the FRBR list, but that list is incredibly
quiet, so I'm not sure I'll get concrete responses back.

-- 
Morbus Iff ( in japan, i'm known as a puchi-iede. )
Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779
Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/
icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus