Re: Proposal: Promote 'citation' property up to CreativeWork

Maori,

While it seems logical that some citations would have identifiers, I 
believe that the DOI and the ISBN identify the CreativeWork itself, not 
the citation. This just means that instead of "citationID" you may want 
a way to link the citation to the work it cites, via an identifier.

kc

On 5/13/13 5:41 PM, Maori Ito wrote:
> +1
> Hi. (I'm Maori. I'm writing to you for the first time.)
> I'm going to recommend new property 'citation ID'.
> You marked up some links with URL.
> If the URL had id, how about using ID property in addition to URL property?
>
> E.g.
> <a itemprop="url" href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3889336">
> <meta itemprop='citationID' content='doi:10.2307/3889336' />
>
> <a itemprop="url"
> href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?vid=ISBN9780520242098">
> <meta itemprop='citationID' content='isbn:9780520242098' />
>
>
> Some vocabularies seem to have proposed ID properties.
>
> - schema.org/Book > isbn
> - schema.org/Product > productID
> - schema.org/Product > gtin13, gtin14, gtin8
>
> Especially, ‘productID’ in Thing > Product expect several types of ID.
> http://schema.org/Product
> I felt the situation is similar to citation.
>
> We proposed schema.org extensions for BiologicalDataBaseEntry and
> BiologicalDatabase last year.
> (I'd like to send you details about it later.)
> Although we made reference property in our vocabularies, if the citation
> proposal will be selected, I'd like to abolish reference property and
> promote to mark-up citation property.
>
> CUS,
>
> Maori
>
> (13/05/08 17:12), Martin Hepp wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> On May 8, 2013, at 2:42 AM, Thad Guidry wrote:
>>
>>> +1 No objections to promoting 'citation' property.  Get 'er done. :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>>> On 7 May 2013 12:26, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:
>>>> In reflection of the silence around this proposal - do I need to add
>>>> it to
>>>> a Wiki page or something?
>>>
>>> It sounds like a perfectly sensible suggestion. If you wouldn't mind
>>> making a little page in
>>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SchemaDotOrgProposals patterned
>>> after the others, it would help track things.
>>>
>>> (Hmm I see the W3C Wiki template system seems not to be working for us
>>> any more; the page headers aren't working as they used to)
>>>
>>> Anyway, let's go ahead with this. I don't think it needs a huge amount
>>> of discussion.
>>>
>>> Does anyone here think it would be a *bad* idea to promote the
>>> 'citation' property to be usable with any CreativeWork?
>>>
>>> Note (to offset any potential objections...) that this does not mean
>>> (a) all creative works _must_ have a citation property (b) nor will it
>>> stand in the way of us coming up with more expressive ways to model
>>> different types of inter-work citations.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>> ~Richard
>>>>
>>>> On 22/03/2013 11:13, "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is the first proposal from the Schema Bib Extend
>>>>> Group<http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/>, consisting of 60+
>>>>> people
>>>> >from a broad cross section of publishers, libraries, and others
>>>>> interested in enhancing Schema.org's capabilities in the area of
>>>>> bibliographic and associated resources.
>>>>>
>>>>> We are working on several proposals.  However this appeared to be an
>>>>> obvious, simple, uncontroversial proposal to start with.
>>>>>
>>>>> Proposal:
>>>>> To promote the 'citation' property, currently on the
>>>>> MedicalScholarlyArticle<http://schema.org/MedicalScholarlyArticle>
>>>>> Type,
>>>>> up to the CreativeWork<http://schema.org/CreativeWork> Type.   Many
>>>>> more
>>>>> creative work types other than medical, or general, scholarly articles
>>>>> can and do cite other works.
>>>>>
>>>>> Although the focus of our group's proposal is obviously bibliographic
>>>>> works, this change could open up wider opportunities for web pages,
>>>>> music
>>>>> (sampling of tracks?), art (description of a collage?), etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> More detail of the proposal is available on the group wiki:
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Citation
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Richard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -Thad
>>> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> 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

Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 22:39:32 UTC