Re: Update: VisualArtwork type proposed in May this year

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Paul Watson <
lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk> wrote:

>  Hi
>
> Some months ago I proposed a VisualArtwork type (details at
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/VisualArtwork)
>
> I have just made 1 edit to the wiki to change the "materials" property to
> the singular "material", which is more in line with other schemas (where
> properties are described in the singular), and allows multiple materials
> used on a single piece of artwork to be marked up individually, e.g.
>
> <span itemprop="material">Oil</span> and <span itemprop="material">Gold
> Leaf</span> on <span itemprop="surface">wood</span>
>
> Thanigai Vellore has also added their suggestions for a ColorPalette
> addition to the VisualArtwork type on the wiki yesterday. I have no
> objections to this addition, even though I would not use those properties
> myself - I can see that it might be useful for certain applications of the
> schema.
>
> There didn't seem to be any objection to the VisualArtwork proposal back
> in May (
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013May/0024.html) and
> several people welcomed/seconded it, and so I was wondering:
>
> What is the process to move this proposal to full inclusion and
> publication on schema.org?
>

I can't help with the process, but I think a more specific property name
than "edition" would be useful.  While the descriptive text is clear, it's
probably not what most people think of when they see the name.

I'd also consider "support" or some other alternative to "surface" since it
often isn't on the surface at all.  You might want to include "Medium" in
the description for "Material" as a synonym that people are likely to
search for.

I'm not really thrilled with the color palette proposal. As you mentioned,
reflective colors, unlike transmissive colors, are entirely dependent on
the light they are reflecting.  I can't imagine any describing an artwork
as 30% sky blue and the RGB hex value is going to be meaningless without
some reference light source (not to mention digital works using non-RGB
color spaces).

Tom