W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > May 2013

Proposal: VisualArtwork

From: Paul Watson <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 20:41:36 +0100
Message-ID: <518958F0.5090204@lazaruscorporation.co.uk>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
Hi,

This is a proposal for a new Type: Thing > CreativeWork > VisualArtwork

I am aware that there are already sub-Types for "Painting", "Sculpture", 
and "Photograph", but this doesn't seem like a viable way forward. There 
are many other types of artwork (printmaking, drawing, collage, 
assemblage, digital art, etc.) and it seems illogical to create new 
Types for each artform.

So my proposal is for the 'VisualArtwork' Type to be used instead of 
"Painting" or "Sculpture", and instead of "Photograph" where the 
photograph in question is being presented in context as an artwork as 
opposed to forensic photography, etc.

A number of additional properties enable would allow a wider range of 
visual artwork media to use this type. These properties are:

* artform (e.g. Painting, Drawing, Sculpture, Print, Photograph, 
Assemblage, Collage, etc.)
* materials (e.g. Oil, Watercolour, Linoprint, Marble, Cyanotype, 
Digital, Lithograph, Pencil, Mixed Media, etc.)
* surface (e.g. Canvas, Paper, Wood, Board, etc.)
* width (an instance of http://schema.org/Distance)
* height (an instance of http://schema.org/Distance)
* depth (an instance of http://schema.org/Distance)
* edition (For multiples such as prints, the number of copies in the 
edition)

As you can see, rather than having many different subTytpes of Creative 
work for paintings, sculptures, prints, drawings, collages, tapestry, 
etc, the VisualArtwork proposal allows the artform to be designated 
under the new "artform" property.

I have written up the proposed new VisualArtwork type at 
http://new-media.lazaruscorporation.co.uk/2013/05/2nd-draft-an-idea-for-an-alternative-schema-org-type-for-artwork/

I would be interested to hear whether this proposal would have any 
support? Apart from implementing microdata and RDFa Lite on website this 
is my first foray into serious thought about extending schemas, and I 
won't be offended by any criticism!

Paul
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2013 20:19:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 7 May 2013 20:19:44 UTC