Re: Updated Schema Architypes Straw Man Proposal

Hi Richard,

Great, thanks. 

Just looking at the #Archive Collection for the time being:

1. Overall this tallies with my attempts - so I’m pleased that I seem to be going in the right direction.

2. can you just clarify for me the syntax re. the creator

schema:creator [ a schema:Person ;
            schema:name "Ronnie Barker" ;
            schema:sameAs <http://viaf.org/viaf/2676198> ] ;

You would do this every time you introduce Types?  So you might do it if you had, for example,  schema:publisher [a schema: Organization

3. just a small error really, but schema: identifier should be GB71 THM/407  and not 407/8. You’ve put temporal coverage as 1954-2005 but its actually 1929-2005 for the whole collection. 

4. hasPart

This particular collection has something like 500 parts (series, sub series, items). To my mind it is not generally going to be practical to use ‘has part’ in this way. I don’t think that matters, as I guess the principle is that you can indicate parts of a whole if you wish to. If I did want to do this, would it be:

schema:hasPart "https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/data/gb71-thm/407/thm/407/1" ;
schema:hasPart "https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/data/gb71-thm/407/thm/407/2” ;
schema:hasPart "https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/data/gb71-thm/407/thm/407/3” ;
schema:hasPart "https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/data/gb71-thm/407/thm/407/4” ;

I’m not yet sure of the benefits of listing 500 parts in this way. 

5. extent

I definitely don’t want to include all the descriptive information within the schema.org representation, but I would tend to include the size of the collection as core information. At present I don’t think there is a property that we could use for this? 

6. archiveHeld

Could this description include:

schema:archiveHeld "V&A Theatre and Performance Collections”

7. Language

From what I gather, to be compliant we would have to use ISO639-1 codes? i.e. inLanguage: “EN” and not “eng”? All of our descriptions use ISO 639-2 so its a shame if we can't use them! 

8. Aboutness

Finally, one of the things I assumed with schema.org is that it would be useful to include what the archive is about. So I thought about using e.g:

schema:about “Comedy”
schema:about “Television comedy"

I was thinking in terms of discoverability. What do you think about adding subjects/people/places in this way? 

cheers
Jane




> On 16 May 2017, at 13:26, Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Following discussions on the mailing list and taking into account general evolution of the schema.org vocabulary over recent months, I have produced an updated version of the straw man initial proposal in the Wiki.
> 
> ~Richard.
> Richard Wallis
> Founder, Data Liberate
> http://dataliberate.com

> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis

> Twitter: @rjw

Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc’s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.

Jisc Services Limited is a wholly owned Jisc subsidiary and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under company number 2881024, VAT number GB 197 0632 86. The registered office is: One Castle Park, Tower Hill, Bristol BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.

Received on Wednesday, 17 May 2017 13:53:08 UTC