- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 07:48:57 -0800
- To: public-vocabs@w3.org
On 12/24/14 2:06 AM, Paul Watson wrote: >> >> Isn't this analogous to the problem of listing product types, which >> has been solved by allowing use of the productOntology. Couldn't >> artforms be schema:additionalType using one or more known >> vocabularies, like AAT or the MARC21 types? >> >> kc >> > Hi Karen > > That's a possibility for the future (or for advanced users), but I think > that removing the artform property and replacing it with > schema:additionalType would put the use of the VisualArtwork schema > class out-of-reach of individual artists and small galleries who aren't > familiar with AAT etc. There's no reason for it to be either/or. Basic art forms could be included in schema, and for those who want more detail additionalType can be used. > > The artform property balances the needs of large academic institutions > (who would like to map artforms from controlled vocabularies such as > AAT, and can do so with this solution) with those of smaller galleries > and individual artists who run their own small websites (but are not > expert web developers or conversant with academic controlled > vocabularies) but want to accurately mark up their linoprints, > assemblages, collages, pencil drawings, pastel drawings, screenprints, > woodcuts, etchings, oil paintings, watercolours, monoprints, etc. using > a simple-to-use schema.org class. The question is what they want to do with these "mark ups." If they want them to be identified by others, not just put on the screen display, then they need a URI for each one to clearly identify the form. If they aren't intending any machine processed use (e.g. matching the same artforms across web sites, or using the form to drive a particular display) then text is fine. I still think that a simple text capability can exist along with the additionalType+URI capability. kc > > Paul > > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Thursday, 25 December 2014 15:49:28 UTC