Definition of dct:creator

[tombaker]

See definition_creator.md. See also Issue #25 ("Add comments for dct:creator).

DCMI Metadata Terms currently defines http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator with the following definition and
usage comment:

An entity primarily responsible for making the resource.

Examples of a Creator include a person, an organization, or a service.

The ISO WG proposes folding the content of the comment into the definition:

An entity, such as a person, organization, or service, primarily
responsible for making the resource.

Note:

• This would be expressed in "ISO style" (lowercase, etc).

• Original proposal from the ISO WG read:

  entity (for instance, a person, an organization or a service) primarily
  responsible for making the resource

[kaiec]

I certainly like the new formulation more than the existing "Examples of a Creator include a person, an organization, or a service." Examples in my opinion refer to instances, not classes, like in this case.

[kcoyle]

"An entity primarily responsible for making the resource."

I have a bit of a problem with "making" the resource, and will try to think of a better term. I also have trouble with "primarily" and "An". While "An" can be understood as "one creator per property", "primarily" seems to imply that there is only one. The question that comes up for me is when you have a performance of a symphony, how you would decide whether the composer, the arranger, or the conductor, or the performers are "primary". The same is true for films, with a handful of producers, directors, cinematographers. Also, the whole "creator vs contributor" is far from clear and can vary based on your point of view. Someone interested in performing arts may consider performers "primary" and writers and producers "contributors".

Primarily responsible -> has direct responsibility for the [creation/?] of the resource
Contributor -> has a role in the resource creation but is not directly responsible for the creation

So I favor moving the language from "primary" to "direct".

[tombaker]

On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 09:27:37AM -0700, kcoyle wrote: "An entity primarily responsible for making the resource." I have a bit of a problem with "making" the resource, and will try to think of a better term.

I'm sure this is not the ideal definition, but I do not really believe in ideal definitions. This has been the definition for more than fifteen years and translated into many languagtes. Proposing changes in established wordings risks opening cans of worms. If we want to propose such changes, we should ask: Is there any evidence that the existing definition is not good enough, or that it is systematically creating confusion? If not, we should IMO live with the existing definitions. There is evidence that people do not read definitions too closely anyway.

I also have trouble with "primarily" and "An". While "An" can be understood as "one creator per property",

Agreed.

"primarily" seems to imply that there is only one.

I do not read it that way, and that is not the way it was intended to be read. (I recall long discussions about this many years ago that I am not keen to re-live.) If the wording really is ambiguous, can this not more simply be handled by user guides?

Primarily responsible -> has direct responsibility for the [creation/?] of the resource Contributor -> has a role in the resource creation but is not directly responsible for the creation So I favor moving the language from "primary" to "direct".

dct:creator is a sub-property of dc:contributor. In other words, every instance of Creator is an instance of Contributor so it is not necessarily correct that a contributor is "not directly responsible".

[kcoyle]

Am still having trouble with "primarily". But didn't realize that creator is sub contributor, since they are defined in library data as separate and different and conceptually disjoint. And the definition of contributor:

An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource.

does not seem to be able to include creator "making the resource" unless you consider "making" a "contribution" but to me they are different things.

It would be very interesting to know how these two terms have been used in practice. My guess is that there will be significant instances using these in the way defined in library data.

[tombaker]

I certainly like the new formulation more than the existing "Examples of a Creator include a person, an organization, or a service." Examples in my opinion refer to instances, not classes, like in this case.

@kaiec This wording also bothers me, with Creator in uppercase. How would you rephrase this? Is it any better if written in lowercase: "Examples of a creator..."? Or are you suggesting it say: "Instances of Creator include..."?

[sarahartmann]

I have a bit of a problem with "making" the resource, and will try to think of a better term.

"primarily" seems to imply that there is only one.
I do not read it that way, and that is not the way

+1, suggestion to simplify:
"An entity, such as a person, organization, or service, responsible for creating the resource."

[juhahakala]

I have replaced the old definition in the ISO draft with Sarah's version.

If this is not OK, the best option is to restore the original text.

[kcoyle]

+1 to Sarah's version.

[tombaker]

We are going with Sarah's version:

entity, such as a person, organization, or service, responsible for creating the resource

Closing.

[aisaac]

+1 (still I'm puzzled that we've never voted on it as a group, therefore reopening)

[tombaker]

2018-07-19: PROPOSAL

Creator is currently defined (with a usage comment):

    An entity primarily responsible for making the resource.
    Examples of a Creator include a person, an organization, or a service.

In effect, the ISO WG would like to see the comment folded into the
definition, and in the discussion, the word "primarily" is seen as
problematic. Sarah has proposed the following formulation:

    entity, such as a person, organization, or service, responsible for
    creating the resource

[tombaker]

APPROVED:

An entity, such as a person, organization, or service, responsible for creating the resource.