W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > March 2016

Re: Suggestion for new category

From: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:19:24 +0000
Message-ID: <CAD47Kz53wF777XTqDe-dq5KOfiaQVPBy+b5YZKHS_B0A0Wz3gg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jacob Jett <jjett2@illinois.edu>
Cc: "public-schemaorg@w3.org" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>, Myung-Ja Han <mhan3@illinois.edu>, "Sarol, Maria Janina Dela Cruz" <mjsarol@illinois.edu>, "Kinnaman, Alex Olivia" <kinnama2@illinois.edu>, "Cole, Timothy W" <t-cole3@illinois.edu>
You are right to identify the differences between ‘the play’, productions
of the play, and performances of the production.

Much of the structure of this is availably via CreativeWork properties such
as hasPart, isPartOf, exampleOfWork, workExample, plus the temporal aspects
of Role that would allow you to associate individual contributors to
specific stages of the process.

Based upon established Schema.org patterns, I would advise separating the
event (place/time) aspects from the Creative aspects.

As to associating elements of the process that contributed to the combined
work, but not part of the final play - I think that is down to how you
describe those individual preproduction parts.

Working on some examples as was done for Books, Articles, TVSeries &
TVSeason, etc. would help work through these questions and help support a
proposal for a Play type

~Richard.


Richard Wallis
Founder, Data Liberate
http://dataliberate.com
Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
Twitter: @rjw

On 3 March 2016 at 14:54, Jacob Jett <jjett2@illinois.edu> wrote:

> That makes perfect sense. However, if we go the 'isPartOf' route don't we
> loose the contextual component that set and costume sketches and
> photographs play in the development of the production? I.e., they are not
> parts of the finished work -- the play -- per se but are deeply involved in
> the evolution of a performance of the final product.
>
> Wouldn't it make more sense if they were parts of particular Theatrical
> Events, as just like the performers of said events, costumes and set
> designs can also vary from performance to performance of the same play.
>
> _____________________________________________________
> Jacob Jett
> Research Assistant
> Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship
> The Graduate School of Library and Information Science
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
> 501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA
> (217) 244-2164
> jjett2@illinois.edu
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Richard Wallis <
> richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote:
>
>> Not wishing to overload CreativeWork in the subtypes department, but
>> ‘Play’ does seem to be an obvious missing candidate.
>>
>> I don’t really think the ’Stage’ qualification is necessary. Most of the
>> properties you reference would be inherited from CreativeWork.  The
>> exceptions being some of the more specific contributors such as
>> StageDesigner and WadrobeKeeper.   These could be handled as per some of
>> the roles in the movie industry are - using the Role
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__schema.org_Role&d=BQMFaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=npggDwlZ6PziBzPBZthSo0f8iGOgRMf9ulO6o4WwfiA&m=5tMndZFeOWtA7vej-9XwBZdhVTmH18Mj5t17yfmtpCo&s=5O53HrBuYZ2xJ8k-qXNdxOWXiTOMowrhAlGWPP953a8&e=>
>> construct.
>>
>> You could then connect the individual performances to the Play using
>> TheaterEvent if appropriate using the workPerformed property.
>>
>> On 3 March 2016 at 14:27, Jacob Jett <jjett2@illinois.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> We have a similar use case but also need to account for things like
>>> costume sketches and photographs (and same for storyboards, set designs,
>>> etc.). Should we just extend the TheaterEvent with new predicates?
>>>
>>
>> Most if not all of those things would be CreativeWorks or subtypes
>> thereof, in their own right and could be considered ‘isPartOf’ of the play.
>>
>> ~Richard
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Tim Turner <tturner@flumc.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is a TheaterEvent that could be expanded from this list.
>>>>
>>>> https://schema.org/TheaterEvent
>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__schema.org_TheaterEvent&d=BQMFaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=npggDwlZ6PziBzPBZthSo0f8iGOgRMf9ulO6o4WwfiA&m=5tMndZFeOWtA7vej-9XwBZdhVTmH18Mj5t17yfmtpCo&s=aa63bKAMCvVjSnfsJFaXpaSAqbwat8spFGjc7owW85E&e=>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Webmestre Globetrottoirs [mailto:webmaster@globetrottoirs.com]
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 02, 2016 1:05 PM
>>>> *To:* public-schemaorg@w3.org
>>>> *Subject:* Suggestion for new category
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am working on a theater group website.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When trying to code micro-data, I felt that the following schema is
>>>> missing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the “Creativework” schema, could we add “TheaterPlay”, which would
>>>> have the following properties :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Name* – expected type : text – description : the name of the play
>>>>
>>>> *Author* – expected type : text – description : the author of the play
>>>>
>>>> *Director* – expected type : text – description : the person who
>>>> directed the play
>>>>
>>>> *Actor* – expected type : text – description : the actors of the play
>>>>
>>>> *Character* – expected type : text – description : the characters of
>>>> the play
>>>>
>>>> *Composer* – expected type : text – description : the composer of the
>>>> music used in the play
>>>>
>>>> *Genre* – expected type : text – description : the genre of the play
>>>> (eg : musical theatre, gesture theatre, pantomime, …)
>>>>
>>>> *StageDesigner* – expected type : text – description : the person who
>>>> designed the settings
>>>>
>>>> *WardrobeKeeper* – expected type : text – description : the person who
>>>> designed or created the wardrobe.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It could be also usefull to create schema related to dance or mime, etc…
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you think it is possible to do this ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your answer.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Stéphane Reboul
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2016 15:19:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 3 March 2016 15:19:54 UTC