- From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:02:38 -0500
- To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAChbWaMGv6D2THgQDpXA8_O1SvbvXVH4YrXPKm2sDWAUrekHEA@mail.gmail.com>
I have a history of working in a large public library system for 7 years. In general, Libraries, just like the Job Market proposal and others coming up like Real Estate, are all nice special domains with wonderful quirks and needs. But their needs overlap other needs and what is most important is to discover those overlaps in intent and very close meaning. Libraries should be treated as a separate domain space because of their special needs. I would begin thinking about the larger super-properties that would encompass GLAM efforts themselves, but that would be it, I would not try to model GLAM, instead just the L in it. Schema.org is going to need that going into the long-tail domains. I would not re-use properties that do not fit the model "exactly" or "very closely". Instead, I would begin modeling New Properties and Types, and extend off of existing Schema.org schema. I would consider it to be an unwise choice to try to re-use or re-appropriate existing Schema.org Types and Properties that do not fit well into the special domains. Re-use where it can be accomplished without redefining, 1st. Then bring up potential sticking points with existing Schema.org Types and Properties for help from the community and then we can circle back to gain deeper insight into potential merges, etc. 1st and foremost... Do not work in a silo. Instead, work with the community. I would like to see a draft of ALL the possible Properties that could be needed for Libraries (do not worry about GLAM yet) and put them up into the Wiki as a work in progress proposal. That way we can all work together. On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: > This is a great example that allows us to get back to the original > question, which I think is one for this group. When one encounters a > property or class that one would like to use in a way that is "not exactly > as initially meant" - what is the preferred approach? > > We could: > 1) use it, and rely on documentation to clarify our community's use > 2) redefine it, so that it fits better into our use case > 3) create a super-property or class and a new subproperty or class > 4) create a new, unrelated property within our own community space > > If there is no overall preference, then does this group want to entertain > ad hoc suggestions for changes to definitions of properties and classes? > > kc > > > On 7/24/13 12:59 AM, Martin Hepp wrote: > >> The serialNumber is in theory meant as a unique item identifier assigned >> at production or market entrance time, like the serial number of a digital >> camera, the Vehicle Identification Number of a car, etc. >> >> A library-specific identifier (like shelf locator ID) is not really a >> serial number. I do not see major problems with using serialNumber this >> way, but it is not exactly as initially meant. >> >> Martin >> >> On Jul 24, 2013, at 9:37 AM, Owen Stephens wrote: >> >> Hi Karen, >>> >>> How would you see serialNumber mentioned by Wes mapping against library >>> item identifiers? >>> >>> Owen >>> >>> Owen Stephens >>> Owen Stephens Consulting >>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com >>> Email: owen@ostephens.com >>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936 >>> >>> On 24 Jul 2013, at 00:15, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >>> >>> Wes, I admit that some of this was a bit cryptic - were you suggesting >>>> the properties below as a solution? We have looked carefully at the full >>>> range of schema.org, in particular /Product and /Offer and are aware >>>> of these. They do not, unfortunately, satisfy our use case. Should "/Offer" >>>> be expanded to be more than "offer for sale" then the concept of a >>>> "merchant-specific identifier for a product or service" fits even though >>>> the actual term "Stock Keeping Unit (SKU)" is not used in the library >>>> community. None of the others represent a local number for an individual >>>> item (not product, but single item). >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> kc >>>> >>>> On 7/23/13 2:45 PM, Wes Turner wrote: >>>> >>>>> Need: >>>>> >>>>> * lookup/index books by a unique (local?) SKU number >>>>> >>>>> WorldCat >>>>> ---------- >>>>> >>>>> WorldCat OCLC supports RDF as RDF/XML, JSON, Turtle, Triples >>>>> http://redd.it.com/1fm5z3/#**cabsejm<http://redd.it.com/1fm5z3/#cabsejm> >>>>> >>>>> (e.g Harry Potter as Turtle) >>>>> http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/**41266045.ttl<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/41266045.ttl> >>>>> >>>>> [... semantic web books] >>>>> http://redd.it/1g7ehd/#**caj4d3ni <http://redd.it/1g7ehd/#caj4d3ni> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Schema.org >>>>> ------------ >>>>> * http://schema.org/docs/full.**html<http://schema.org/docs/full.html> >>>>> * http://schema.rdfs.org/all.ttl >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> schema:Thing > schema:CreativeWork > schema:Book >>>>> >>>>> /isbn -- string literal. ISBN-(10 &&|| 13 ?) number. >>>>> >>>>> [/sku -- string literal. SKU number] -> schema:Product/sku >>>>> >>>>> schema:Thing > schema:Product >>>>> >>>>> /gtin13 -- ISBN-13 / EAN UCC-13 / 0UPC-12 >>>>> /gtin14 -- GTIN-14 >>>>> /gtin8 -- EAN UCC-8 >>>>> >>>>> /productID -- The product identifier, such as ISBN. >>>>> For example: <meta >>>>> itemprop='productID' >>>>> content='isbn:123-456-789'/>. >>>>> >>>>> /sku -- The Stock Keeping Unit (SKU), >>>>> i.e. a merchant-specific identifier for a product or >>>>> service, >>>>> or the product to which the offer refers. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> schema:Thing > schema:Product > schema:IndividualProduct >>>>> >>>>> /serialNumber -- The serial number or any alphanumeric identifier >>>>> of a particular product. >>>>> When attached to an offer, it is a shortcut for >>>>> the serial number of the product included in the >>>>> offer. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Karen Coyle >>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596 >>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 >>>> skype: kcoylenet >>>> >>>> >>> >> ------------------------------**-------------------------- >> martin hepp >> e-business & web science research group >> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen >> >> e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org >> phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 >> fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 >> www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) >> http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) >> skype: mfhepp >> twitter: mfhepp >> >> Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! >> ==============================**==============================**===== >> * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ >> >> >> >> >> > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > ph: 1-510-540-7596 > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet > > -- -Thad Thad on Freebase.com <http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry> Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2013 14:03:07 UTC