- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 10:05:21 +0100
- To: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
- Cc: Ingrid Mason <ingrid.b.mason@gmail.com>, "Mark A. Matienzo" <mark.matienzo@gmail.com>, "public-architypes@w3.org" <public-architypes@w3.org>, "dan@coffeecode.net" <dan@coffeecode.net>
-1 to say an Archive is a kind of LocalBusiness. In the description: > A particular physical business or branch of an organization. Examples of LocalBusiness include a restaurant, a particular branch of a restaurant chain, a branch of a bank, a medical practice, a club, a bowling alley, etc. If anything, the name "LocalBusiness" is what is wrong. This just means an physical presence of an organization, like a shop, branch, office, venue - but in particular that is somewhat open for consumers (opening hours and payment options). This explanation still makes sense for a regular Library (even if it's not a Business), but not for say Pentagon, and I would argue not for many kinds of Archives. Does an Archive have to be physical? So https://archive.org/ and http://zenodo.org/ doesn't count - none of the LocalBusiness properties make sense there. I thought we were particularly also supporting digital archives here. Physical archives like the Svalbard Global Seed Vault has as a main feature that it is *not* open nor accessible and I don't see why this should come up as a LocalBusiness in Svalbard. On 28 July 2015 at 12:25, Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote: > Hi Ingrid, > > Thoughts inline below > > ~Richard > On 28 July 2015 at 01:40, Ingrid Mason <ingrid.b.mason@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Kaching! >> >> My 2c (apologies upfront, I wasn't in the discussion at LODLAM in case >> this got worked over) and I'm looking at Schema.org for the first time >> properly. Feel free to point me to some background reading and to resist >> opining. > > > Best place to start is Schema.org and the FAQ. You will see from these > that Schema.org is a general purpose vocabulary (currently of 600+ Types and > 900+ properties) for describing things on the web - I would add the implicit > 'so they can be discovered'. These aims - describing things and for > discovery - result in a certain uncomfortable reaction for those new to it. > Such as books having a name not a title, Volcano having the ability to > define a faxNumber, and your concerns about LocalBusiness. > >> >> But.. I am having a reaction to the suggestion that an archive or library >> operates as a subclass of LocalBusiness. > > > Do not read too much into type name of LocalBusiness. It is just a useful > way to combine the properties from Place and Organization plus openingHours > (see this pre-release view of Library which shows the type inheritance > better) > >> >> What's the purpose here? To share information about the GLAM group entity >> or its collection/archival material or both? I'm wagering both and that >> they need to be treated separately. >> >> >> Archives (as group entity) sit within diverse organisation types. >> Archives (as material that emerges from activities). >> >> Same goes for libraries and library collections. > > The purpose of the potential archive.schema.org extension is to share > information about: > > An archive organization with a physical/virtual presence (address, > parentOrganization, department(s), openingHours etc.) > > Organizations such as The National Archives > Organizations of all types - commercial, not for profit, government, etc. > Organizations could add this to their other descriptive types e.g. An > organization could be a Library AND an Archive > > An archive - an archived collection of things > > Ownership/responsibility not necessarily associated with an organization > that declares itself an Archive. > > Things within an archive > > Including but not restricted to creative work > > This discussion thread is focussed on the first of these. >> >> >> Could not a CollectingOrganisation entity be a type of Organisation? > > > It could be, but I'm not sure what extra value/properties would be gained by > this move - we would still need to add in most of what comes from > LocalBusiness. > >> >> >> Rather than CreativeWork, perhaps HeritageObject or something equally >> stretchy to encompass diverse GLAM collection materials. > > > This will be the subject of another, I expect long, thread about what is > unique about things in an archive that we want to share and help make them > discoverable. > >> >> >> Ingrid (Canberra) >> >> *GLAM being galleries, libraries, archives, museums >> >> >> >> >> >> On 28 July 2015 at 09:24, Mark A. Matienzo <mark.matienzo@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Richard, all - >>> >>> As noted on my comments the proposal on Github [0], I'm in favor of this >>> proposal. I also made a suggestion that we defer to the ICA-ISDIAH [1] >>> definition (i.e., an "archive" in this sense as an institution with >>> "archival holdings," rather than the stuff itself). >>> >>> [0] >>> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/628#issuecomment-125371578 >>> [1] http://www.ica.org/10198/standards/isdiah >>> >>> -- >>> Mark A. Matienzo <mark@matienzo.org> | http://anarchivi.st/ >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Richard Wallis >>> <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Karen, >>>> >>>> Singular / plural term names have been a discussion since the early days >>>> of Schema.org that eventually settled in favor of singular. >>>> >>>> Yes, what is/isn't a creative work is definitely the subject for another >>>> discussion, which we should start soon. >>>> >>>> ~Richard >>>> >>>> Richard Wallis >>>> Founder, Data Liberate >>>> http://dataliberate.com >>>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis >>>> Twitter: @rjw >>>> >>>> On 27 July 2015 at 19:22, GRACY, KAREN F <kgracy@kent.edu> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I would be in support of adding Archive as a new subclass under >>>>> schema:LocalBusiness. There is the question of whether we should use the >>>>> singular or pluralized version of the word (archive and archives are often >>>>> used interchangeably). The Glossary of Archival Records and Terminology >>>>> (published by the Society of American Archivists) provides entries on each >>>>> version (see http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/a/archive and >>>>> http://www2.archivists.org/glossary/terms/a/archives for Glossary >>>>> definitions). >>>>> >>>>> In my estimation, the more serious concern might be with classifying >>>>> archival documents as Creative Works (but I will save my comments for that >>>>> conversation!). >>>>> >>>>> Karen >>>>> >>>>> *********************************************************** >>>>> >>>>> Karen F. Gracy >>>>> Associate Professor >>>>> School of Library and Information Science >>>>> Kent State University >>>>> kgracy@kent.edu >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 27, 2015, at 8:02 AM, Richard Wallis >>>>> <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> This is the first of a few conversations we need to start in building >>>>> towards some consensus around proposals. >>>>> >>>>> Prior to the setting up of this group Dan Scott proposed a new >>>>> Schema.org type 'Archive': >>>>> >>>>> In preparing to attend the LODLAM Summit 2015 (Linked Open Data for >>>>> Libraries, Archives, and Museums), it is glaringly evident that we are >>>>> missing a class to represent archives. >>>>> >>>>> The simplest possible place to start would be to parallel >>>>> schema:Library by subclassing schema:LocalBusiness with a definition such as >>>>> "An entity that collects documents and records related to the activities of >>>>> people or organizations." >>>>> >>>>> This would enable us to describe archives as a specific class of >>>>> LocalBusiness with schema.org, rather than having to use LocalBusiness >>>>> directly. >>>>> >>>>> This raised comments regarding the too commercial nature of the >>>>> LocalBusiness definition, which could be enhanced to include something along >>>>> lines that "businesses may also be not-for-profit or state-owned." >>>>> >>>>> Are we happy to take on that proposal - do we have comments? >>>>> >>>>> ~Richard >>>>> >>>>> Richard Wallis >>>>> Founder, Data Liberate >>>>> http://dataliberate.com >>>>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis >>>>> Twitter: @rjw >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- Stian Soiland-Reyes, eScience Lab School of Computer Science The University of Manchester http://soiland-reyes.com/stian/work/ http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Received on Thursday, 30 July 2015 09:06:10 UTC