MiniSKOS update

Ok, there have been a number of positive comments on the original
MiniSKOS proposal
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Nov/0121.html)
here, and with others I've tried the idea on elsewhere.

I have done the following:

* created an issue-grouping product 'SKOS proposals to Schema.org' in
the W3C WebSchemas tracker,
https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/products/4
* created a top level tracking issue
https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/30 which we'll close if
we ever get this done
* created https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/31 to track
Phil's specific concern about the targetUrl property being used with
Topic
* added genre as possibly taking Topic values; as Niklas says, this is
also a good candidate for controlled values
* added the existing http://schema.org/MedicalCode type as also being
a subtype of Topic
* lifted the codeValue and codingSystem properties up to live on
Topic, from MedicalCode.
* Updated RDFS:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/file/default/schema.org/ext/miniskos.html
and test build: http://sdo-wip1.appspot.com/Topic

The current text of http://sdo-wip1.appspot.com/Topic is a bit wordy,
but hopefully sets scope:

"""Schema.org's notion of 'Topic' covers categories, controlled lists
of values, subject classification codes (e.g. UDC, Dewey), thesauri
and other controlled codes. This mechanism is not intended as a
general-purpose knowledge representation system. In schema.org a Topic
code (typically published at some url, eg. using W3C SKOS) can be used
to express what a creative work is 'about', but also it can be used
with the occupationalCategory of a JobPosting, amongst other
properties. For example, the targetUrl of an AlignmentObject can also
be used in this way, when describing educationally-oriented resources.
'Topic' in schema.org corresponds to 'Concept' in W3C's SKOS language.
Simple textual descriptions of a topical 'codeValue' and its
'codingSystem' can also be expressed textually"""

If we decide against targetUrl being used here, the AlignmentObject
sentence will need changing/removing.

How's it looking? Any other outstanding issues beyond the LRMI
targetUrl concern?

Dan

On 20 November 2013 15:25, Web Schemas TF Issue Tracker
<sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
> webschema-ISSUE-31 (MiniSKOS-LRMI): Schema.org miniSKOS proposal needs careful design for LRMI targetUrl property [SKOS proposals to Schema.org]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/31
>
> Raised by: Dan Brickley
> On product: SKOS proposals to Schema.org
>
>
> >From Phil Barker, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Nov/0128.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Nov/att-0128/00-part
> also on LRMI list, see https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lrmi/jwgo02DpQzY
>
> Phil notes that the original miniSKOS proposal declares targetUrl as having a possible expected type of 'Topic'. The properties of that Topic (described locally or remotely) are similar to those of the http://schema.org/AlignmentObject which has the http://schema.org/targetUrl property.
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2013 15:36:56 UTC