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

Re: Proposal: Periodicals, Articles and Multi-volume Works

From: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 10:19:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJcoVMhiH4X4P_5pGP5NCxj4TWfz3afQFGnARBYG1Pi-vkWuAw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Cc: "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>
>> On 23 January 2014 20:52, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Wallis,Richard <
>> Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> The SchemaBibEx Group has completed a significant piece of work to
>> arrive
>> >> at a proposal to address the basic description of Articles within
>> issues
>> >> and/or volumes of periodicals of most types - scholarly journals,
>> magazines,
>> >> comics, etc.   The intention being to establish a basic structure that
>> would
>> >> be applicable to many areas, which could be built upon in more
>> specific ways
>> >> for certain domains if need in the future.
>> >>
>> >> The proposal is on the Web Schemas wiki:
>> >>
>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi-volume_Works
>> >>
>> >> It proposes three new Types: Periodical, PublicationVolume,
>> >> PublicationIssue, and added properties for two existent Types: Article,
>> >> CreativeWork.
>> >>
>> >> Through this work it became clear that the same framework would also
>> >> support the description of multi-volume works (e.g.. Lord of the Rings)
>> >>
>> >> We also propose, although it is not our direct area of concern, that
>> the
>> >> Blog type would then naturally fit in the type hierarchy as a sub-type
>> of
>> >> our proposed Periodical type.
>> >>
>> >> A couple of issues that arose in our discussions that we would wish to
>> >> seek comment from the list:
>> >> sameAs or url
>> >>
>> >>  In one of our examples we reference the uri of another description of
>> the
>> >> article described:
>> >>
>> >> <a property="sameAs"
>> >> href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.682254
>> ">10.1080/01639374.2012.682254</a>
>> >>
>> >> The discussion was as to if ‘url’ was the appropriate property to use
>> >> instead of 'sameAs’.
>> >> I shared the majority view that ‘sameAs' was correct.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Stating owl equivalence or not
>> >>
>> >> Some of the proposed properties are derived from the bibo ontology.
>>  Our
>> >> inclination is to recommend that in the published documentation
>> >> owl:equivalentClass and owl:equivalentProperty should be included, as
>> >> against just referencing in text bibo as their inspiration.
>> >
>> > Note that a draft RDFS is at
>> >
>> https://github.com/dbs/schemabibex/blob/master/schema.org/ext/periodicals.html
>> > -- it currently lacks the owl:equivalent* assertions, but otherwise I
>> think
>> > it is pretty close to being complete.
>>
>> Ok I've generated a test build of the site, available temporarily at
>> http://sdo-wip3.appspot.com/Periodical
>>
>> Please take a look, it's often easier to review these things in context.
>>
>> Thanks again for putting this together :)
>>
>
> Damn, I totally screwed up the domainIncludes directives. Copied and
> pasted them, and changed the textual values, but didn't change the actual
> hrefs.
>
> Let me fix that up in the git repo... So sorry about this screw up, Dan!
>

Okay, I've fixed that up;
https://github.com/dbs/schemabibex/blob/master/schema.org/ext/periodicals.htmlshould
now contain the *correct* domain / domainIncludes assertions.

On that note: should all of the domain assertions simply be domainIncludes
assertions? I used domain when there was only one valid value, but am not
sure if that's standard practice for schema.org RDFS.

Once again, my deep apologies for wasting your time, Dan (and the time of
everyone else on the list who might be puzzling over what they're seeing in
the current test build of the site).

Dan
Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2014 15:20:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:36 UTC