Re: Proposal: Replace dctypes with schema.org

Courtesy of Dan Scott, we could simply propose a new class in schema.org.
Seems like it would be useful outside of this work...

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2015Mar/0113.html

Rob



On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Denenberg, Ray <rden@loc.gov> wrote:

> Please, no.  let’s just define the class oa:Text.
>
>
>
> Ray
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* jgjett@gmail.com [mailto:jgjett@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Jacob
> Jett
> *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 2:12 PM
> *To:* Web Annotation
> *Subject:* Re: Proposal: Replace dctypes with schema.org
>
>
>
> Hi Rob,
>
>
>
> This tentatively looks good. With regards to text, we'd likely to have to
> use the extremely abstract schema:CreativeWork class. We'd might want to
> further clarify using the predicate-object combo of "schema:genre
> schema:Text" to make an assertion about the Creative Work. This does seem
> more modern than Dublin Core but I do wonder if it is actually better.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Jacob
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
>
> Jacob Jett
> Research Assistant
> Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship
> The Graduate School of Library and Information Science
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
> 501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA
> (217) 244-2164
> jjett2@illinois.edu
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> As discussed on the call on Wednesday, we should make a change to the list
> of types for body and target at least to replace Image with StillImage.  A
> further suggestion was that we should consider schema.org classes as more
> modern and likely to be better integrated with other systems.
>
>
>
> It would also give us easy classes for Code, SoftwareApplication, Game,
> WebPage... but there isn't one (that I can find) for generic Textual
> content.  schema:Text is a datatype, rather than a class for resources.
>
>
>
> Thus the list maps currently as:
>
>
>
> Dataset            -->  schema:Dataset
>
> StillImage         -->  schema:ImageObject
>
> MovingImage   -->  schema:VideoObject
>
> Sound              -->  schema:AudioObject
>
> Text                 -->   :(
>
>
>
> We could be more explicit with our typing for Text:
>
>
>
> oa:Tag  when the body is a tag.
>
> oa:SemanticTag when it's a semantic tag
>
> schema:Comment when it's a comment [w/ oa:commenting]
>
> schema:Review when the body is a review
>
>
>
> schema:WebPage when the body/target is a full webpage
>
> schema:WebPageElement when the body/target is part of a page
>
>
> And then leave anything beyond those to further communities to define?  Is
> there anything in our current set of use cases that would fall out side of
> the above?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> --
>
> Rob Sanderson
>
> Information Standards Advocate
>
> Digital Library Systems and Services
>
> Stanford, CA 94305
>
>
>



-- 
Rob Sanderson
Information Standards Advocate
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305