Re: Missing Schema.Org properties from Laura Dawson on 2012-12-05 (public-schemabibex@w3.org from December 2012)

From: Laura Dawson <ljndawson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:35:41 -0500
To: Ross Singer <rxs@talis.com>
CC: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CCE4A9B7.17054%ljndawson@gmail.com>
Fair enough. 

From:  Ross Singer <rxs@talis.com>
Date:  Wednesday, December 5, 2012 7:34 AM
To:  Laura Dawson <ljndawson@gmail.com>
Cc:  Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>,
"public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: Missing Schema.Org properties

My point is that this is not relevant to schema.org <http://schema.org> .
There is only one doi, /that/ is the identifier. It doesn't matter what that
identifier resolves to downstream: the referent being described only needs
the identifier. 

If this is that much of a concern, you could always use an info:uri
(although I would recommend against this).

-Ross. 

On Dec 5, 2012, at 4:54 AM, Laura Dawson <ljndawson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Further to that, an excerpt from the Linked Content Coalition's spec for
> identifiers, submitted to the International DOI Foundation in November:
> 
> An identifier should be capable of being resolved to more than one location
> for 
> different types or instances of metadata, typically to find least one basic
> description 
> and one statement of rights.
> € Multiple resolution of an identifier should be possible without special
> knowledge 
> except for the ability to communicate using standard technical protocols.
> € Multiple resolution therefore requires some basic and extensible standard
> ³typing² of 
> resolution so that different services (in this case, different metadata types)
> can be 
> automatically located. This approach is common and usually implicit within
> proprietary closed systems but is not yet generally recognised as an
> inevitable 
> requirement of open linked data
> 
> From:  Ross Singer <rxs@talis.com>
> Date:  Tuesday, December 4, 2012 2:30 PM
> To:  Laura Dawson <ljndawson@gmail.com>
> Cc:  Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>,
> "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
> Subject:  Re: Missing Schema.Org <http://Schema.Org>  properties
> 
> On Dec 4, 2012, at 2:26 PM, LAURA DAWSON <ljndawson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> DOIs can resolve to multiple URLs, which can get tricky. (Right now ISNIs
>> don't resolve but we are working on that.)
>> 
> Again, though, are any of these problems?  URIs don't have to be HTTP uris.
> Also dois themselves /can't/ resolve to multiple URLs.  If it's an HTTP URI
> (e.g. http://dx.doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxxx) it can only resolve to /one/ place (at
> dx.doi.org <http://dx.doi.org> ), which redirect you to, at most, one other
> place.
> 
> -Ross.
> 
>> On Dec 4, 2012, at 7:23 PM, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Call me naive, but I contend that most bibliographic identifiers are
>>> expressable as URIs (URNs, info-uris, URLs) and that as such they can use
>>> microdata's itemid [1]. Is there really a problem here?
>>> 
>>> //Ed
>>> 
>>> [1] 
>>> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/microdata.html#g
>>> lobal-identifiers-for-items
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 12/4/12 5:01 AM, Shlomo Sanders wrote:
>>>>> For what it is worth, I prefer:
>>>>> 
>>>>>      ISBN-10<span property=" identifier" typeof="ISBN">0316769487</span>
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think this is correct -- unless you have a property that is "ISBN".
>>>> The "typeof" takes a property, not a value.
>>>> 
>>>> Any values have to be outside of the <> unless you use a meta tag. see:
>>>>   http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#advanced_missing
>>>> <http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#advanced_missing>
>>>> 
>>>> Maybe that's how we'll have to go - with meta.
>>>> 
>>>> kc
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Or
>>>>>      ISBN-10: <span itemprop="isbn">0316769487</span>
>>>>> 
>>>>> These are short and clean.
>>>>> The itemprop="isbn" is not generic since the valid values for itemprop is
>>>>> enumerated?
>>>>> Is that the same issue for typeof?
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net]
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 14:58
>>>>> To: public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Missing Schema.Org <http://schema.org/>  properties
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do we need to consider how this might be displayed, since schema.org
>>>>> <http://schema.org/>  generally wraps around a display? These two options
>>>>> would result in different displays:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 12/4/12 3:33 AM, Shlomo Sanders wrote:
>>>>>> How is this as a schema.org <http://schema.org/>  "friendly" version of
>>>>>> the ONIX structure:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> <div typeof="identifier">
>>>>>>             <span property=" identifierValue ">0316769487</span>
>>>>>>             <span property=" identifierType ">ISBN</span> </div>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 0316769487 ISBN
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Seems too long to me, perhaps:    <span property=" identifier"
>>>>>> typeof="ISBN">0316769487</span>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 0316769487
>>>>> 
>>>>> The schema.org <http://schema.org/>  documentation shows a similar example
>>>>> to this latter approach using price:
>>>>> 
>>>>>     Price: <span itemprop="price">$6.99</span>
>>>>>     <meta itemprop="priceCurrency" content="USD" />
>>>>> 
>>>>> This gets the "$6.99" display for the human reader, plus the currency type
>>>>> for processing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The current use of ISBN is illustrated as:
>>>>> 
>>>>>      ISBN-10: <span itemprop="isbn">0316769487</span>
>>>>> 
>>>>> If we go with id type and value, then display is limited by the defined
>>>>> types, unless we leave type very loose. To get the same display as the
>>>>> ISBN immediately above, we'd need:
>>>>> 
>>>>> <div itemprop="identifier" itemscope="http://schema.org/Identifier
>>>>> <http://schema.org/Identifier> ">
>>>>>     <span itemprop="idType">ISBN-10: </span>
>>>>>     <span itemprop="idValue">0316769487</span>
>>>>> </div>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Does identifier type do what we want if it's not a controlled value? Or
>>>>> would we need a <meta> with a controlled value?
>>>>> 
>>>>> kc
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 20:28
>>>>>> To: Graham Bell
>>>>>> Cc: public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Missing Schema.Org <http://schema.org/>  properties
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I do, however, see a significant difference between schema.org
>>>>>> <http://schema.org/>  and the XML structure of ONIX (or any other
>>>>>> XML-based metadata): schema.org <http://schema.org/>  allows the data to
>>>>>> be flattened to a single horizon of data. This is for the sake of
>>>>>> simplicity, if I understand correctly. There seems to be a philosophy in
>>>>>> schema.org <http://schema.org/>  that avoids a strict division of
>>>>>> descriptions into "right" and "wrong." XML, instead, is really an
>>>>>> enforcement mechanism.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm leery of adding much structure to schema.org <http://schema.org/> .
>>>>>> Or at least, of either requiring it or relying on it. That makes the
>>>>>> identifier "problem"
>>>>>> particularly difficult. It is for this reason that I asked, in response
>>>>>> to Shlomo's post, whether one can make use of the self-identifying nature
>>>>>> of URIs. That doesn't help us with non-URI identifiers, but it seems that
>>>>>> we are moving increasingly in the direction of "fully formed"
>>>>>> identifiers.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> kc
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/3/12 8:41 AM, Graham Bell wrote:
>>>>>>> Worth saying at this point that this is EXACTLY how ONIX is structured:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>       <entityIdentifier>
>>>>>>>            <entityIDType>
>>>>>>>            <IDTypeName>
>>>>>>>            <IDValue>
>>>>>>>       </entityIdentifier>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> where 'entity' might be 'product', 'work', 'name', or whatever. There
>>>>>>> is a controlled vocabulary for common IDTypes, and if you have some
>>>>>>> proprietary identifier not in the list, you must include a 'likely to
>>>>>>> be unique' name for it in <IDTypeName> instead.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> A point of history -- ONIX started (in 1999) with a property per
>>>>>>> identifier type: there were tags called <ISBN> and <UPC>, but as
>>>>>>> pointed out below, that isn't really practical, so the above XML
>>>>>>> structure is used extensively now. It's easy to add to the controlled
>>>>>>> vocabulary when a new identifier comes along, without having to
>>>>>>> change the schema. In UML, it looks like the attached, and I leave
>>>>>>> the RDF as an exercise for the reader...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Graham
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Graham Bell
>>>>>>> EDItEUR
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7503 6418 <tel:%2B44%2020%207503%206418>
>>>>>>> Mob: +44 7887 754958 <tel:%2B44%207887%20754958>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> EDItEUR Limited is a company limited by guarantee, registered in
>>>>>>> England no 2994705. Registered Office: United House, North Road,
>>>>>>> London N7 9DP, UK. Website: http://www.editeur.org
>>>>>>> <http://www.editeur.org/>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 3 Dec 2012, at 16:18, Laura Dawson wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That might work, actually.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Dec 3, 2012, at 4:05 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
>>>>>>> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 12/3/12 7:19 AM, Richard Wallis wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Shlomo,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Couple of points.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> *Identifiers: *This is a particular concern of mine.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Me, too!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The approach of
>>>>>>> having a named property for each possible identifier that a
>>>>>>> CreativeWork or a Person could have, just does not scale.  However
>>>>>>> to handle this you will always be disenfranchising some identifier
>>>>>>> backing group.  Isbn seems to of got in because it is know by everyone,
>>>>>>> oclcnum is obvious
>>>>>>> from where I sit (but that does not make it right).   I think we (in all
>>>>>>> of Schema, not just the bib domain) need an identifier Type with
>>>>>>> properties of 'identifierValue' and 'identifierType' - which could
>>>>>>> handle either an enumerated list or at least well known identifier
>>>>>>> names.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I believe that this means that "Identifier" becomes a "schema" in
>>>>>>> schema.org <http://schema.org/>  <http://schema.org <http://schema.org/>
>>>>>>> >.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> kc
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ~Richard.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net <http://kcoyle.net/>
>>>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596 <tel:1-510-540-7596>
>>>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234>
>>>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net <http://kcoyle.net/>
>>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596 <tel:1-510-540-7596>
>>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234>
>>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net <http://kcoyle.net/>
>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596 <tel:1-510-540-7596>
>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234>
>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>> 
>>> 
>
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2012 13:07:44 UTC