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

Re: itemprop="translator"

From: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 12:36:22 -0400
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Cc: "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>, "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, Chaals from Yandex <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20140902163621.GA9843@denials>
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 04:20:13PM +0100, Dan Brickley wrote:
>On 2 September 2014 15:38, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:
>> Already in place:
>>
>> Schema:Book has an illustrator property
>> Schema:Movie has director, producer, productionCompany properties
>
>Glancing through http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relacode.html
>there's a lot in there. Are there any super-useful things we're
>missing that could be argued for inclusion as first class properties?

There is indeed a lot in there, but as I mentioned a few times
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Feb/0095.html
being a recent mention) there's also still a whole lot missing,
for example, for Comic "colorist" is in the LoC relators, but the other
primary roles of interest expressed by Henry and Peter (inker, penciler,
letterer) are missing; many Movie / Media roles are missing like best
boy, gaffer, grip, hair stylist, makeup artist, welder, construction
group head (see http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120338/fullcredits for an
exhaustive list from one big movie).

>Otherwise having a way to point from a Role to external lists seems a
>potentially useful convention (though perhaps overkill).

Perhaps overkill, but websites like IMDB feel that there's enough value
to expressng the nuanced contributions of the complete cast and crew
that they do so. We or other groups could develop and maintain external
LD property lists for that purpose, or try to get LoC to add more
entries to the MARC relator codes, but I fear that would be a slow path
to follow.

Taking a quick look at other external vocabs that took a crack at the
movie domain, http://linkedmdb.org/ has a small set of roles such as
Casting Director, Production Designer, Set Designer, while
http://www.movieontology.org/ adds roles like CostumeDesigner, but
nobody seems to have a reasonably complete set to use as an external
list.

Perhaps, as Gregg suggested later in that same thread at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Feb/0104.html,
dbpedia is the way to go.  while my limited SPARQL attempt "SELECT ?p
WHERE { ?p rdfs:range dbpedia-owl:Person } ORDER BY ?p)" didn't show a
ton of satisfying results, blindly throwing in
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Inker, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Letterer,
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Penciler is much more encouraging.

>>>>> On 1 Sep 2014, at 15:35, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>>>>>  I was under the impression that creative works would be able to use the "roles" pattern that was discussed [1].  Right now, CreativeWork has author, creator, and contributor. Although there are a handful of common creative roles that come to mind (editor, translator, illustrator), the actual number blossoms quickly when you move beyond books. Movies have a huge number of creative roles; music also has quite a few (librettist, composer, performer, lead singer...). The roles list used by the Library of Congress gives an idea of the magnitude of the problem. [2]
>>>>>>  kc
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  [1]  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014May/0085.html
>>>>>>  [2] http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators.html

http://dbpedia.org/resource/Librettist redirects to
http://dbpedia.org/page/Libretto -- would that be problematic for our
purposes?

>Another option is to just use native (microdata/rdfa/json-ld) syntax
>for additional more detailed properties. If I remember right, multiple
>relation types between is a single pair of entities is most awkward in
>JSON-LD.
>
>In RDFa, this seems ok (needs @rel not @property):
>
>(where ANM is relator code for "A person contributing to a moving
>image work or computer program by giving apparent movement to
>inanimate objects or drawings"; perhaps not a perfect classification
>of Richard Williams' complex role here but enough for an example)
>
><p vocab="http://schema.org/" typeof="Movie">
> <span property="name">The Thief and the Cobbler</span>
> <link property="sameAs"
>href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thief_and_the_Cobbler"/>
> <span rel="contributor http://www.loc.gov/loc.terms/relators/ANM">

Pedantic: perhaps that URI should be
http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/anm?

>If all we want is additional relationship types, then creating an
>intermediate Role entity could be rather heavyweight, since RDFa and
>Microdata seem to tolerate whitespace-separated lists of properties.

I think this (whitespace-separated lists of properties) would work, as
long as we provide some guidance to adopters so that most Comics
entities in the wild would use http://dbpedia.org/resource/Inker,
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Letterer,
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Penciler, etc. (Yes, equivalence statements
would let the machines work things out if someone else opted to use,
say, freebase or another external vocab instead, but I'm thinking
primarily of saving the time of the data publishers from having to hunt
the IDs down in the first place).

Anyone want to take a stab at providing the Movie equivalents for the
titanic (heh) list of Titanic contributions?
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2014 16:36:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:44 UTC