I think there are various approaches you can take depending upon what your objectives are.
1. Identify (describe) the document and provide access to it. Using CRM this would harmonise with other CRM data.
2. Identify particular fragments of the text (using FRBRoo).
3. Tag particular things in the text
In terms of 3 there is TEI but also the option of using CRM in RDFa tags to identify entities and relationships in the text that would have correspondence in the data. This is an approach we have used at the BM. RDFa tags can be used to identify people, places, subjects etc, and can link these entities using CRM properties. These can operate on their own as an extension to the RDF store or be harvested into the RDF store.
On Tuesday, 8 September 2015, 6:05, Conal Tuohy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
I have recently made an experimental software application to generate a Linked Data expression of Museum Data from the public collection API of Museum Victoria (Melbourne, Australia).
The Museum Victoria API is a custom-built web application which returns custom JSON data. My experimental software is a proxy which translates their JSON into RDF/XML using the Erlangen OWL version of the CIDOC CRM. More details available here: http://conaltuohy.com/blog/lod-from-custom-web-api/
The Museum Victoria database contains a number of "articles" which each describe one or more objects in their collection. I have modelled each of these as an "E31 Document", and related them to the corresponding collection items using "P70 documents".
My question is how to express the text of the actual articles (which the Museum Victoria API provides as an HTML fragment embedded in its JSON response). At the moment I have simply used rdf:value to attach the HTML fragment as an XML literal to the E31 Document instance. Is this the recommended practice?
Crm-sig mailing listCrmemail@example.com://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig