Re: Minimal WPUB for a scholarly paper (of sort)

He Hadrien,

> On 4 Jun 2018, at 15:41, Hadrien Gardeur <hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com <mailto:hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com>> wrote:
> 
> Hello Ivan,
> 
> Just a few notes:
> the minimal example is incorrect, there's an extra "," at the end of the list of resources
Oops. Handled. 

> I've tried the example in the JSON-LD playground and resources is not ignored, it's mapped to http://schema.org/resources <http://schema.org/resources> instead (I don't think there's a solution for that issue if we don't roll out our own JSON-LD context document)
It is my mistake: I should have checked!

There is a solution: we do not use the term "resources"… We have to use a term that is _not_ a schema.org <http://schema.org/> term. I have changed the examples to use "publ-resources" for now, and we can have then an enjoyable set of bike shedding to find a suitable name...

> same issue with toc
See above...

> too bad that we don't have a rel value for the object representations in resources, this would allow us to re-use existing rel values such as privacy-policy or contents

Agreed, and it may one of the items we would have to see with schema.org <http://schema.org/>. I guess that, for the purpose of WPUB, we can agree to use the http://schema.org/disambiguatingDescription <http://schema.org/disambiguatingDescription> term for something like that, but a controlled vocabulary may have been better indeed.

> I'm really not a fan of the string representation (URI) for the list of resources
This was discussed at the F2F, and I base things on the resolution…

Thanks!

Cheers


> Best,
> Hadrien


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>