Re: Next Meeting - Schema Bib Extend W3C Group - 17th October

2012/10/16 jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com>

> Hi All,



> Any subject described in the classes of Schema.org (person, organization,
> creative work, product, intangible...) can be referenced in a controlled
> vocabulary with the specific formalism of a controlled vocabulary and the
> specific relationships it allows (broader, narrower, related and alignment
> relationships). The aim of the controlled vocabulary description of the
> concept, is not to descripe the subject itself, but to describe it as a
> "concept" in a controlled vocabulary, describing a given set of subjects,
> which someone wants to use to classify or describe something else.
>
> Administration and publication of a controlled vocabulary implies some
> best practices and rules about concept definition, labels, life of the
> concept.. which are the same for all class of subjects.
>
> So in my mind the concept description can double a description of the
> subject as a person, a product, an event, in the same publication. This
> would probably means to be able to describe a link between the skos:concept
> page  and the page about this subject, for example between the concept of
> "Chicago" in the controlled vocabulary, and a page describing Chicago as a
> place in the same web site.
>
> So the objective here is not to describe subject which are not actually
> described by Shema.org but to give a very oriented "taxonomist" view on any
> possible subject.
>
> As a matter of fact, my first tought was to add a class "concept" at the
> upper level under Thing. This class would not have be exclusive from
> belonging to any other class.
>
> Jean
>
>
> 2012/10/16 jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com>
>
>> Richard,
>>
>> I did publish a brief description a link on the uploaded copy of the
>> document.
>>
>> Jean
>>
>>
>> 2012/10/16 Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>
>>
>>>  Jean,
>>>
>>> Would you have any objection to your proposal being published on the
>>> Group Wiki?
>>>
>>> If it is OK by you, you could append a brief description to the Areas
>>> for Discussion page <
>>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Areas_for_Discussion> and
>>> link to an uploaded copy of the document.
>>>
>>> ~Richard.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 16/10/2012 14:10, "Tami Ezra" <Tami.Ezra@exlibrisgroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> My name is Tami Ezra and I am a senior business analyst at Ex Libris.
>>>
>>> I am interested in the proposal discussed below - would it be possible
>>> to get a copy?
>>>
>>> Many thanks
>>>
>>> Tami
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Young,Jeff (OR) [mailto:jyoung@oclc.org <jyoung@oclc.org>]
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 16, 2012 3:24 AM
>>> *To:* jean delahousse KC; public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>> *Subject:* RE: Next Meeting - Schema Bib Extend W3C Group - 17th October
>>>
>>> Jean,
>>>
>>> I like where this is heading. In the experimental WorldCat.org Linked
>>> Data so far (online RDFa and bulk N-Triples) I used skos:Concept for these
>>> situations. In my dev environment, though, I started the switch to
>>> schema:Intangible but wasn’t entirely happy with it. This proposal is much
>>> more satisfying.
>>>
>>> One issue comes to mind for discussion, though. This proposed
>>> schema:Concept feels more equivalent to FRBR Concept than it does to
>>> skos:Concept. The difference is subtle but real, IMO, and has to do with
>>> foaf:focus (with a range of “Thing” and inverse of
>>> madsrdf:isIdentifiedByAuthority) being a meaningful property for the latter
>>> (skos:Concept) but not the former (FRBR Concept). VIAF (which doesn’t
>>> currently attempt to identify FRBR Concepts) is probably the best
>>> illustration of the issues involved.
>>>
>>> I realize that schema:Concept is destined to be a compromise, but it
>>> would be nice (albeit perhaps not necessary) if this group had a clear
>>> understanding and articulation of those compromises to minimize confusion
>>> in industrial-strength use cases.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* delahousse.jean@gmail.com [mailto:delahousse.jean@gmail.com<delahousse.jean@gmail.com>]
>>> *On Behalf Of *jean delahousse KC
>>> *Sent:* Monday, October 15, 2012 10:13 AM
>>> *To:* public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: Next Meeting - Schema Bib Extend W3C Group - 17th October
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> First I want to thank you for accepting my application to participate to
>>> your work group.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I had been working this summer on an extension of Schema.org for
>>> controlled vocabularies based on Skos ontology. After BnF published Rameau
>>> in the LOD but also as web pages, one for each concept, I thought it will
>>> be useful to have an extension of Schema.org to make concepts defined in
>>> controlled vocabularies more visible by search engines.
>>>
>>> Concepts are good candidates for TopicPages, and work as hub to access
>>> well annotated contents or others Topic Pages. They are a valuable asset
>>> for content / knowledge access from a search engine.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Also it happens to find "glossary", "terminology" or "lexicon" in a web
>>> site. This extension of Schema.org will enable to describe those types of
>>> publication.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I took the initiative of this work but immediately ask for support and
>>> review work to Antoine Isaac and Romain Weinz. They have been very
>>> encouraging and already proposed corrections included in this version.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You'll find attached the proposal for the Skos Schema.org extension, we
>>> made it as simple and light as possible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I propose, if the group agrees, to have a first discussion on this
>>> proposal inside our group before to publish it for a larger audience..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Talk to you on Thursday.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jean Delahousse
>>>
>>> 2012/10/10 Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> It is about time we followed up on the excellent first meeting we had.
>>>
>>> I have scheduled conference call time for 11:00am EDT next Wednesday
>>> 17th October for us to start to talk through some of the issues and
>>> suggestions we discussed last time.
>>>
>>> You will find call in details and a provisional agenda on the group wiki
>>> here: http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Meet_20121017
>>>
>>> If you have suggestions for the agenda, either edit the wiki or drop me
>>> a line.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>     Richard.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Richard Wallis
>>> Technology Evangelist
>>> OCLC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> delahousse.jean@gmail.com - +33 6 01 22 48 55 - skype: jean.delahousse - blog
>> >contenus >données >sémantique <http://jean-delahousse.net> -
>> twitter.com/jdelahousse
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> delahousse.jean@gmail.com - +33 6 01 22 48 55 - skype: jean.delahousse - blog
> >contenus >données >sémantique <http://jean-delahousse.net> -
> twitter.com/jdelahousse
>
>
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
delahousse.jean@gmail.com - +33 6 01 22 48 55 - skype: jean.delahousse - blog
>contenus >données >sémantique <http://jean-delahousse.net> -
twitter.com/jdelahousse