W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > April 2014

Re: Periodical proposal

From: Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 18:01:31 +0000
To: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A63CCDF7-B767-4B43-A6D6-9CC49388396D@oclc.org>
(An obviously biased too ;-)  +1


~Richard

On 7 Apr 2014, at 11:54, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net<mailto:dan@coffeecode.net>> wrote:

On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 08:42:08AM +0100, Dan Brickley wrote:
On 7 April 2014 06:38, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
There was a proposal for periodicals [1] that got a brief discussion on this
list [2] but then disappeared. Does anyone know where this is in the overall
scheme (or schema) of things?

I put up that test site a few weeks back, and revisited it ...
yesterday. I've made a new test version of the site using the new
schema.org<http://schema.org> codebase that we switched to last week. See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Apr/0051.html ->
http://sdo-culture-bundle.appspot.com/Periodical (I didn't add the
examples yet).

wiki: https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi-volume_Works
schema: https://github.com/dbs/schemabibex/blob/master/schema.org/ext/periodicals.html

I'd also like to move these things along. Original thread started
here, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Jan/0086.html

Are there any open problems with this design? Can I get some +1s from
people that believe adding it will be a useful improvement? (not
everyone here follows the bibextend list...)

+1 (but I'm obviously biased)


cheers,

Dan

p.s. is the JSON-LD in
https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi-volume_Works#JSON-LD_.28experimental.29
ok? (it's marked as experimental)

I marked it as experimental because I'm still not confident in my
JSON-LD mastery. Expert opinions appreciated! If I recall
correctly, it was just an automated conversion of the RDFa example that
used http://www.w3.org/2012/pyRdfa/Overview.html. The Ruby RDFa service
at http://rdf.greggkellogg.net/distiller generates a different JSON-LD
serialization, and the JSON-LD playground does not like the Ruby
service's version due to a "cyclical context definition" error, so...
Received on Monday, 7 April 2014 18:02:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:39 UTC