- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 08:19:18 -0700
- To: public-schemabibex@w3.org
Note that schema.org has http://schema.org/BookFormatType, which has Ebook Hardback Paperback kc On 7/5/13 7:43 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote: > For paperbacks and similar things, I've started using Product Ontology > to tag the item/manifestation descriptions for example: > > @prefix schema: <http://schema.org/> . > @prefix pto: <http://www.productontology.org/id/> . > > :book1 > a schema:Book, schema:ProductModel, pto:Paperback ; > etc. > > The coverage isn't perfect, but it has the advantage of being backed up > by Wikipedia. > > Jeff > > Sent from my iPad > > On Jul 5, 2013, at 10:35 AM, "Ross Singer" <rxs@talis.com > <mailto:rxs@talis.com>> wrote: > >> On Jul 5, 2013, at 10:25 AM, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org >> <mailto:jyoung@oclc.org>> wrote: >>> >>> Aside, I would argue that the defining characteristic of Item is that >>> it has "location". For physical items that location can be determined >>> by geolocation (for example). For Web items (aka Web documents), the >>> location can be determined by its URL. >> >> +1 >> >> I would say there are arguably more defining characteristics than that >> (I'm still going to argue that "paperback" isn't actually a part of >> the manifestation, simply an inference of the sum of the format of the >> items), but this, I would argue, is definitely the least common >> denominator and applies well for our entity model in schema.org >> <http://schema.org>. >> >> -Ross. >> >>> >>> Jeff >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Jul 5, 2013, at 9:55 AM, "Ross Singer" <rxs@talis.com >>> <mailto:rxs@talis.com>> wrote: >>> >>>> But this all really how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, >>>> isn't it? >>>> >>>> We've already established that we're not interested in defining any >>>> strict interpretation of FRBR in schema.org <http://schema.org/>: >>>> we're just trying to define a way to describe things in HTML that >>>> computers can parse. >>>> >>>> Yes, I think we need to establish what an item is, no I don't think >>>> we have to use FRBR as a strict guide. >>>> >>>> -Ross. >>>> >>>> On Jul 5, 2013, at 8:51 AM, James Weinheimer >>>> <weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com <mailto:weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 05/07/2013 13:30, Ross Singer wrote: >>>>> <snip> >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess I don't understand why offering epub, pdf, and html >>>>>> versions of the same resource doesn't constitute "items". >>>>>> >>>>>> If you look at an article in arxiv.org <http://arxiv.org/>, for >>>>>> example, where else in WEMI would you put the available file formats? >>>>>> >>>>>> Basically, format should be tied to the item, although for >>>>>> physical items, any manifestation's item will generally be the >>>>>> same format (although I don't see why a scan of a paperback would >>>>>> become a new endeavor, honestly). >>>>>> >>>>>> In the end, I don't see how digital is any different than print in >>>>>> this regard. >>>>>> >>>>> </snip> >>>>> >>>>> Because manifestations are defined by their format (among other >>>>> things). Therefore, a movie of, e.g. Moby Dick that is a >>>>> videocassette is considered to be a different manifestation from >>>>> that of a DVD. Each one is described separately. So, if you have >>>>> multiple copies of the same format for the same content those are >>>>> called copies. But if you have different formats for the same >>>>> content, those are different manifestations. >>>>> >>>>> The examples in arxiv.org <http://arxiv.org/> are just like I >>>>> mentioned in archive.org <http://archive.org/> and they follow a >>>>> different sort of structure. You do not see this in a library >>>>> catalog, where each format will get a different manifestation, so >>>>> that each format can be described. >>>>> >>>>> As a result, things work quite differently. Look for e.g. Moby Dick >>>>> in Worldcat, and you will see all kinds of formats available in the >>>>> left-hand column. >>>>> https://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=worldcat_org_all&q=moby+dick >>>>> >>>>> When you click on an individual record, >>>>> http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/62208367 you will see where all of the >>>>> copies of this particular format of this particular expression are >>>>> located. This is the manifestation. And its purpose is to organize >>>>> all of the *copies*, as is done here. >>>>> >>>>> In the IA, we see something different: >>>>> http://archive.org/details/mobydickorwhale02melvuoft, where this >>>>> display brings together the different manifestations: pdf, text, >>>>> etc. There is no corresponding concept in FRBR for what we see in >>>>> the Internet Archive, or in arxiv.org <http://arxiv.org/>. >>>>> >>>>> I am not complaining or finding fault, but what I am saying is that >>>>> the primary reason this sort of thing works for digital materials >>>>> is because there are no real "duplicates". (There are other serious >>>>> problems that I won't mention here) In my opinion, introducing the >>>>> Internet Archive-type structure into a library-type catalog based >>>>> on physical materials with multitudes of copies would result in a >>>>> completely incoherent hash. >>>>> >>>>> This is why I am saying that FRBR does not translate well to >>>>> digital materials on the internet. >>>>> >>>>> Getting rid of the concept of the "record" has been the supposed >>>>> remedy, but it seems to me that the final result (i.e. what the >>>>> user will experience) will still be the incoherent mash I mentioned >>>>> above: where innumerable items and multiple manifestations will be >>>>> mashed together. Perhaps somebody could come up with a way to make >>>>> this coherent and useful, but I have never seen anything like it >>>>> and cannot imagine how it could work. >>>>> -- >>>>> *James Weinheimer* weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com >>>>> *First Thus* http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ >>>>> *First Thus Facebook Page* https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus >>>>> *Cooperative Cataloging Rules* >>>>> http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ >>>>> *Cataloging Matters Podcasts* >>>>> http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html >>>> >> -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Friday, 5 July 2013 15:19:45 UTC