Re: Missing Schema.Org properties

My point is that this is not relevant to schema.org. There is only one doi, /that/ is the identifier. It doesn't matter what that identifier resolves to downstream: the referent being described only needs the identifier. 

If this is that much of a concern, you could always use an info:uri (although I would recommend against this). 

-Ross. 

On Dec 5, 2012, at 4:54 AM, Laura Dawson <ljndawson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Further to that, an excerpt from the Linked Content Coalition's spec for identifiers, submitted to the International DOI Foundation in November:
> 
> An identifier should be capable of being resolved to more than one location for 
> different types or instances of metadata, typically to find least one basic description 
> and one statement of rights.    
> • Multiple resolution of an identifier should be possible without special knowledge 
> except for the ability to communicate using standard technical protocols.    
> • Multiple resolution therefore requires some basic and extensible standard “typing” of 
> resolution so that different services (in this case, different metadata types) can be 
> automatically located. This approach is common and usually implicit within 
> proprietary closed systems but is not yet generally recognised as an inevitable 
> requirement of open linked data
> 
> From: Ross Singer <rxs@talis.com>
> Date: Tuesday, December 4, 2012 2:30 PM
> To: Laura Dawson <ljndawson@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Missing Schema.Org properties
> 
> On Dec 4, 2012, at 2:26 PM, LAURA DAWSON <ljndawson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> DOIs can resolve to multiple URLs, which can get tricky. (Right now ISNIs don't resolve but we are working on that.)
> Again, though, are any of these problems?  URIs don't have to be HTTP uris..  Also dois themselves /can't/ resolve to multiple URLs.  If it's an HTTP URI (e.g. http://dx.doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxxx) it can only resolve to /one/ place (at dx.doi.org), which redirect you to, at most, one other place.
> 
> -Ross.
> 
>> On Dec 4, 2012, at 7:23 PM, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Call me naive, but I contend that most bibliographic identifiers are expressable as URIs (URNs, info-uris, URLs) and that as such they can use microdata's itemid [1]. Is there really a problem here?
>>> 
>>> //Ed
>>> 
>>> [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/microdata.html#global-identifiers-for-items
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 12/4/12 5:01 AM, Shlomo Sanders wrote:
>>>>> For what it is worth, I prefer:
>>>>> 
>>>>>      ISBN-10<span property=" identifier" typeof="ISBN">0316769487</span>
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think this is correct -- unless you have a property that is "ISBN". The "typeof" takes a property, not a value.
>>>> 
>>>> Any values have to be outside of the <> unless you use a meta tag. see:
>>>>   http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#advanced_missing
>>>> 
>>>> Maybe that's how we'll have to go - with meta.
>>>> 
>>>> kc
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Or
>>>>>      ISBN-10: <span itemprop="isbn">0316769487</span>
>>>>> 
>>>>> These are short and clean.
>>>>> The itemprop="isbn" is not generic since the valid values for itemprop is enumerated?
>>>>> Is that the same issue for typeof?
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net]
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 14:58
>>>>> To: public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Missing Schema.Org properties
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do we need to consider how this might be displayed, since schema.org generally wraps around a display? These two options would result in different displays:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 12/4/12 3:33 AM, Shlomo Sanders wrote:
>>>>>> How is this as a schema.org "friendly" version of the ONIX structure:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> <div typeof="identifier">
>>>>>>             <span property=" identifierValue ">0316769487</span>
>>>>>>             <span property=" identifierType ">ISBN</span> </div>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 0316769487 ISBN
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Seems too long to me, perhaps:    <span property=" identifier" typeof="ISBN">0316769487</span>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 0316769487
>>>>> 
>>>>> The schema.org documentation shows a similar example to this latter approach using price:
>>>>> 
>>>>>     Price: <span itemprop="price">$6.99</span>
>>>>>     <meta itemprop="priceCurrency" content="USD" />
>>>>> 
>>>>> This gets the "$6.99" display for the human reader, plus the currency type for processing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The current use of ISBN is illustrated as:
>>>>> 
>>>>>      ISBN-10: <span itemprop="isbn">0316769487</span>
>>>>> 
>>>>> If we go with id type and value, then display is limited by the defined types, unless we leave type very loose. To get the same display as the ISBN immediately above, we'd need:
>>>>> 
>>>>> <div itemprop="identifier" itemscope="http://schema.org/Identifier">
>>>>>     <span itemprop="idType">ISBN-10: </span>
>>>>>     <span itemprop="idValue">0316769487</span>
>>>>> </div>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Does identifier type do what we want if it's not a controlled value? Or would we need a <meta> with a controlled value?
>>>>> 
>>>>> kc
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 20:28
>>>>>> To: Graham Bell
>>>>>> Cc: public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Missing Schema.Org properties
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I do, however, see a significant difference between schema.org and the XML structure of ONIX (or any other XML-based metadata): schema.org allows the data to be flattened to a single horizon of data. This is for the sake of simplicity, if I understand correctly. There seems to be a philosophy in schema.org that avoids a strict division of descriptions into "right" and "wrong." XML, instead, is really an enforcement mechanism.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm leery of adding much structure to schema.org. Or at least, of either requiring it or relying on it. That makes the identifier "problem"
>>>>>> particularly difficult. It is for this reason that I asked, in response to Shlomo's post, whether one can make use of the self-identifying nature of URIs. That doesn't help us with non-URI identifiers, but it seems that we are moving increasingly in the direction of "fully formed"
>>>>>> identifiers.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> kc
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/3/12 8:41 AM, Graham Bell wrote:
>>>>>>> Worth saying at this point that this is EXACTLY how ONIX is structured:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>       <entityIdentifier>
>>>>>>>            <entityIDType>
>>>>>>>            <IDTypeName>
>>>>>>>            <IDValue>
>>>>>>>       </entityIdentifier>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> where 'entity' might be 'product', 'work', 'name', or whatever. There
>>>>>>> is a controlled vocabulary for common IDTypes, and if you have some
>>>>>>> proprietary identifier not in the list, you must include a 'likely to
>>>>>>> be unique' name for it in <IDTypeName> instead.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> A point of history -- ONIX started (in 1999) with a property per
>>>>>>> identifier type: there were tags called <ISBN> and <UPC>, but as
>>>>>>> pointed out below, that isn't really practical, so the above XML
>>>>>>> structure is used extensively now. It's easy to add to the controlled
>>>>>>> vocabulary when a new identifier comes along, without having to
>>>>>>> change the schema. In UML, it looks like the attached, and I leave
>>>>>>> the RDF as an exercise for the reader...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Graham
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Graham Bell
>>>>>>> EDItEUR
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7503 6418
>>>>>>> Mob: +44 7887 754958
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> EDItEUR Limited is a company limited by guarantee, registered in
>>>>>>> England no 2994705. Registered Office: United House, North Road,
>>>>>>> London N7 9DP, UK. Website: http://www.editeur.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 3 Dec 2012, at 16:18, Laura Dawson wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> That might work, actually.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Dec 3, 2012, at 4:05 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
>>>>>>>> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 12/3/12 7:19 AM, Richard Wallis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Shlomo,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Couple of points.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> *Identifiers: *This is a particular concern of mine.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Me, too!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The approach of
>>>>>>>>>> having a named property for each possible identifier that a
>>>>>>>>>> CreativeWork or a Person could have, just does not scale.  However
>>>>>>>>>> to handle this you will always be disenfranchising some identifier
>>>>>>>>>> backing group.  Isbn seems to of got in because it is know by everyone, oclcnum is obvious
>>>>>>>>>> from where I sit (but that does not make it right).   I think we (in all
>>>>>>>>>> of Schema, not just the bib domain) need an identifier Type with
>>>>>>>>>> properties of 'identifierValue' and 'identifierType' - which could
>>>>>>>>>> handle either an enumerated list or at least well known identifier
>>>>>>>>>> names.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I believe that this means that "Identifier" becomes a "schema" in
>>>>>>>>> schema.org <http://schema.org>.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> kc
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> ~Richard.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>>>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>