frbr:embodiment is enough without frbr:embodimentOf, no?
In #swig discussion today, I (re?)discovered Ian Davis's FRBR and RDF. Nifty stuff, but this business of making two properties for each relationship (embodiment and embodimentOf) seems like a bad idea... an AntiPattern, even. Let's see if HasPropertyOf stands the test of WikiConsensus.
I tried to note this as a comment on Ian's item, but comments are closed. I wonder why.