Re: Three steps

+1

On 28/11/2012 13:54, "Shlomo Sanders" <Shlomo.Sanders@exlibrisgroup.com>
wrote:

> The punch line is the last sentence.
> Create alternative examples of RDFa with VALUES so that the alternatives can
> be immediately understood and compared.
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: Richard Wallis [richard.wallis@oclc.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 2:09 PM
> To: public-schemabibex@w3.org
> Cc: Young,Jeff (OR); Vizine-Goetz,Diane
> Subject: Three steps
> 
> Išm stepping out of the thread that seems to have developed an all
> encompassing life of its own [Itemprop for person] to pick up on an issue
> identified in the recent contributions between Karen and myself.
> 
> This is the example of how to represent the author when marking up a work (for
> now lets assume a book with person as an author).
> 
> I said that the author property of the Book should be a URI to a description
> of a Person (either a local Person description that onward links to authority
> like VIAF, or a direct link to an authority).
> 
> Karen, quite rightly came, back to say that a library may only have a string
> of characters for the author name so can not do what I describe.
> 
> This sort of scenario leads me to suggest that we approach such descriptive
> challenges in a three step process:
> 
> 
>   1.  How to describe what we have, using Schema as it is
>   2.  What changes/enhancements, if any, to Schema could we propose to improve
> the description [and pragmatically expect the Schema group to accept]
>   3.  Provide examples/recipes for how the markup would look in each case
> 
> Applying this to the Book->author problem....
> 
> Step 1.
> schema:Book->author is a property that requires a link to a Person or
> Organization ­ not a literal string.   Therefore example markup would require
> links to Person description either externally supplied or created locally on
> the fly.
> 
> Step 2.
> We only have a string for an author name, so why not suggest that Schema
> relaxes the restrictions on Book->author to enable the use of strings.  Taking
> account of the underlying philosophy behind Schema (Things not Strings), it is
> exceedingly unlikely that such a proposal would be accepted as it would break
> their related entities model of the world.
> 
> Step 3.
> We need to provide examples of how we would markup various situations that
> would cope with my ideal view and Karenšs real situation of only having an
> author string ­ plus possibly a few in-between.  I believe that it would be
> possible to satisfy Schemašs need for a Person description (in this case with
> only a name property) by creating a description in line on the fly.
> 
> I am conscious that as a group we have not been good at sharing example markup
> ­  I include me in that, my RDFa is not as good as I would like it to be ­ how
> we rectify this is something I ant to address in the next call. (tomorrow)
> 
> ~Richard.
>

Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 13:06:53 UTC