schema:URL (was re: Re: journal article for next call?)

As an aside, when I see Schema.org properties with a range of "URL" I think, "to hell with them, I'm publishing the identifier for a schema:Thing". 

I don't care if search engines misunderstand. What on earth were they thinking?

Jeff

Sent from my iPad

> On Nov 28, 2013, at 3:19 PM, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 11/28/13 7:39 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Perhaps CreativeWork therefore gets a "cover" property with a range of
>> ImageObject that can be repeated; the ImageObject's "name" property
>> would then enable the repeated variants to be distinguished?
> 
> 
> Note:
> 
> Thing has:
> image    URL    URL of an image of the item.
> 
> and
> 
> CreativeWork has:
> thumbnailUrl    URL    A thumbnail image relevant to the Thing.
> 
> which I'm guessing could be a non-specific property that could include cover art on a book or DVD, as well as a thumbnail of an art work.
> 
> I note that musicRecording has not specified a property for album art, and the examples don't show any use of that. (Aaargh! sometimes the examples don't see helpful.)
> 
> 
>> 
>>> NB: I wouldn't have objection to use Collection's 'hasPart' to indicate that
>>> an issue has several components (and so that some issues are collections
>>> indeed). But it's also possible to make 'article' a sub-property' of
>>> hasPart. This would do the trick at the formal level, while keeping a
>>> property that has much 'business sense'. But of course this pattern has the
>>> disadvantage of needing (some) people (and machines) to look at the property
>>> definition.
>> 
>> Right, I'm in favour of "article" as a subproperty of "hasPart", this
>> would be consistent with having made "partOfIssuance" and
>> "partOfPeriodical" subproperties of "hasPart" as well, so I'll make
>> that change now. (Checking the Periodical proposal, I will call those
>> out as "subPropertyOf" rather than "subClassOf" to be RDFS-compliant).
>> I don't see any downside to this.
> 
> We did discuss articles that are not parts of anything -- like the pre-publication articles in arxiv.org. (example in http://kcoyle.net/articles/) I also found a number of items coded as "article" in WorldCat that are quite vague about what they may or may not be a part of:
> 
> Nippon (Japanese) Cataloging Rules and International Cataloging Principles: Similarities and Differences
> Edition/Format:    Chapter Chapter : English
> Database:    Walter de Gruyter eBooks
> 
> 
> I think what I am seeing here are databases that offer separate chapters and people are beginning not to care so much about the original book. These may be what Shlomo was referring to. I suppose in these cases the article could simply be considered "part of" the database?
> 
> kc
> 
> 
> -- 
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
>

Received on Friday, 29 November 2013 02:09:25 UTC