W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-architypes@w3.org > November 2017

inital model and extent model

From: Mulinder, Alec <Alec.Mulinder@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 09:27:42 +0000
To: "'public-architypes@w3.org'" <public-architypes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3a38cb5adbe946f986e10678cd36f050@NA-EXCHANGE2.in.tna.local>
We've had some initial discussions at The National Archives and have the following feedback

*         Our preference is for model 2: primarily as this stops prolonging confusion over the use of terms like archive item, it would still work across paper and born digital records, and feels like we are starting with a clean slate

*         Is the intention is to replace EAD for data exchange and online publishing, or is it to provide a 'schema light' to aid discoverability, but not replace any existing domain specific schema?

*         If the intention (or likely knock-on effect) is to ultimately replace EAD then there is need for a lot more properties (e.g. in Archive Component type).

*         There is a need to think about the impact on EAD (a hierarchical encoding schema) and about how archives networks could produce schema.org outputs from their current systems.

*         How does this work relates to Records In Context (RIC)? RIC is only a conceptual model at the moment but it is going to have an ontology and it would be useful to know if there is any thought to make these shared terms. This will probably depend on the purpose of the schema.org extension.

*         Archives should not be considered a sub-type of local business. Museum is treated as a subtype of CivicStructure, which might be a better alternative.

*         Our first impression is that new properties would have to be added to the extension for us to map our wealth of data.

It has been really interesting following the discussion and there is interest at The National Archives in participating further in designing an archival extension, but this partly depends upon its purpose. The more generic higher level it is the less engagement from The National Archives is required, but if the intention is to replace EAD and to expand the number of properties in the Schema.org archival extension, then The National Archives would be interested in discussing how it could involve itself more in the design process.
Kind regards

Dr Alec Mulinder
Head of Digital Risk, Standards, and Engagement
The National Archives | Kew | Richmond | Surrey TW9 4DU | +44 (0)20 8392 5200 x2554


Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.


National Archives Disclaimer
This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the 
individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and 
have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email. 
Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do 
not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor 
endorsed by it.


(image/png attachment: image001.png)

Received on Thursday, 9 November 2017 09:29:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:57:15 UTC