- From: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:14:59 +0000
- To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
" that is the opposite of what libraries do" - True, but that is the way the
Schema.org vocabulary is structured, and we are trying to ascertain how to
describe bib resources using schema, not trying to [re]craft schema in a
library way.
I wasn't suggesting the adding of a property to schema:Person, it already
has a additionalName property which could be used for alternatives. The
more I think about it though, I would assume that a Person would just have
multiple 'name' properties - still gives us the issue of which, if any, is
the primary name.
~Richard.
On 12/11/2012 20:36, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/12/12 7:27 AM, Richard Wallis wrote:
>> Thanks for clarification Karen.
>>
>> The thing we need to take into account when using something like Schema.org
>> is that they use classes to describe real world Things, such as people -
>> their names, and possibly pseudonyms, being just properties of that Person.
>>
>> So a [library world] personal name will end up being mapped to the 'name'
>> property of a Person <http://schema.org/Person>. Likewise a [library world]
>> corporate name will end up being mapped to the name property of an
>> Organisation <http://schema.org/Organization>.
>>
>> We may suggest that the description for the additionalName property of
>> Person be adjusted to allow for it to contain a pseudonym.
>
> Richard,
>
> I'm sure there could be some use for such a property, however, that is
> the opposite of what libraries do. At least post-ALA rules libraries in
> the Anglo-American cataloging world. There is no attempt in our library
> data to identify a pseudonym as such, nor to distinguish between the
> "real person's name" and a pseudonym. "Mark Twain" has equal existence
> to "Samuel Clemens" and they each have a pointer to the other in their
> "see also" references. But the "real" person is not given any
> precedence, and I'm not at all sure that you can even tell which name
> represents the real person and which the pseudonym. Now, it may be that
> in some future this information will be available in library data, but
> what I'm saying is that I hesitate to add to a schema today a property
> for data that we cannot provide today. Maybe I should be more
> fore-sighted. ;-)
>
> I did look at DBPedia, out of curiosity, and interestingly the entry for
> Mark Twain [1] has these two properties:
>
> dbpedia-owl:pseudonym "Mark Twain"
> dbprop:alternativeNames "Samuel Langhorne Clemens"
>
> There is no page for SLC, and if you produce a DBPedia URI with SLC as
> the page name, you are directed to the Mark Twain page with no
> explanation. All of the "sameAs" properties link to various "Mark
> Twain"s. When it comes to "real world" it's hard to know which is more
> real. Biographies of Mark Twain exist, and in the minds of some folks
> Twain is more "real" than "Clemens" - just as Mary Lincoln is more real
> than Mary Todd (who married Abraham Lincoln).
>
> My point is that the distinction between real person and pseudonym may
> be more than we should take on, at least based on library data.
> Oftentimes the difference is not known. If we do ask for it, it needs to
> go in both directions: from pseudonym to "real name" and from "real
> name" to pseudonym. But again, I'm for putting this off for the first
> round of bibliographic data, until we see how it might be used.
>
> kc
> [1] http://dbpedia.org/page/Mark_Twain
>
>>
>> ~Richard.
>>
>>
>> On 12/11/2012 15:07, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/12/12 8:31 AM, Richard Wallis wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Two authors writing under a single name has me stumped at the moment,
>>>> and I think we would have difficulty in convincing the Schema.org folks
>>>> to make changes to cope with such an edge case. Perhaps we should
>>>> default to describing them as a Person with an explanatory note as a
>>>> description (not liking that I have just said that.)
>>>
>>> Richard, I don't think that the library data that we have today
>>> distinguishes between "real" names and pseudonyms. I see nothing in the
>>> authority record that encodes this either. So what we have is "personal
>>> names" (and it's not "person" it's "personal name"), corporate names,
>>> family names, and each of these can either be an Agent (1XX, 7XX, 8XX)
>>> or a subject (6XX). That's it, at least in the MARC world. It would be
>>> interesting to hear from a wider international group if there are
>>> library standards that include more information about the relationship
>>> between the name and a Real World Object.
>>>
>>> kc
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ~Richard.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 09/11/2012 19:58, "Owen Stephens" <owen@ostephens.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not to mention fictional representations of real people in
>>>> literature, film etc.
>>>>
>>>> I understand the desire to label characters/organisations as
>>>> fictional, but I'm not clear what the use case is? What are we
>>>> trying to enable with this apart from 'better description'?
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>> Owen Stephens
>>>> Owen Stephens Consulting
>>>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
>>>> Email: owen@ostephens.com
>>>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>>>>
>>>> On 9 Nov 2012, at 21:25, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The "fictional" category here is a bit ambiguous, if I interpret
>>>> this discussion correctly. There are characters that appear in
>>>> fiction (Sherlock Holmes); there are named personae that
>>>> represent a person, such as pseudonyms ("Mark Twain"), and there
>>>> are also personae that are not 1-to-1 with a person, such as two
>>>> or more authors who write together under a single personal name.
>>>> The former is fictional, the latter two are real. To my
>>>> knowledge, library cataloging treats these two cases, invented
>>>> fictional characters and personae that function as creators, as
>>>> two different things. Only one of these is an Agent in the sense
>>>> of dc:creator.
>>>>
>>>> Finding a bright line to separate these two types of "persons"
>>>> is not easy. Film librarians have told me that users expect to
>>>> find "Mickey Mouse" or "Nemo" in the same way that they would
>>>> find the names of actors in a film. And the "Lassie" example is
>>>> a real poser since Lassie was both a character but also the
>>>> "actor" in the films. Library cataloging only treats the
>>>> fictional characters as subject headings (and topical, not
>>>> personal subject headings).
>>>>
>>>> I think one needs to follow the example of FOAF and say that if
>>>> someone gives it a personal name then it is a person. That's the
>>>> reverse of what has been the main approach so far, which is "if
>>>> it's a person, then code it as a personal name."
>>>>
>>>> kc
>>>>
>>>> On 11/8/12 1:29 PM, Richard Wallis wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Assuming that you define a ghost as a Person, yes.
>>>>
>>>> Presuming that we lobbied successfully to add a Boolean
>>>> 'isFictional'
>>>> property to the Schema.org <http://Schema.org> Thing class
>>>> any other class that inherits from
>>>> Thing could use it.
>>>>
>>>> Check out the description of the Person class
>>>> <http://schema.org/Person> 'A
>>>> person (alive, dead, undead, or fictional).' and you will
>>>> see the five
>>>> properties inherited from Thing listed at the top.
>>>>
>>>> ~Richard.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08/11/2012 16:17, "Pilsk, Suzanne" <PilskS@si.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is the discussion that goes on in the library
>>>> cataloging standards group
>>>> - that crops up when a new batch of catalogers are
>>>> trained and are surprised
>>>> by the "rules".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Casper the friendly ghost - fictional to some, a real
>>>> ghost to others.
>>>> Lassie - the dog - a real dog - actually played by
>>>> multiple canines.
>>>>
>>>> I like the idea of a person is a person who is fictional
>>>> vs taking a "fake
>>>> personality" and making it a "thing".
>>>>
>>>> We have a linked data project in the works with FAKE
>>>> Botanists.
>>>>
>>>> So Richard, are you saying it would be person (is
>>>> fictional) - under "Thing"?
>>>>
>>>> Suzanne
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suzanne C. Pilsk
>>>> Head, Metadata Unit
>>>> Smithsonian Institution Libraries
>>>> Connecting. Ideas. Information. You.
>>>> 10th & Constitution Avenues, NW, NH2207
>>>> MRC 154, P.O. Box 37012
>>>> Washington, DC 20013-7012
>>>> v. 202.633.1646
>>>> PilskS@si.edu
>>>> Please consider the environment before printing this
>>>> email.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Richard Wallis [mailto:richard.wallis@oclc.org]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 4:15 PM
>>>> To: Dawson, Laura; public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Itemprop for person
>>>>
>>>> In the Schema.org world the 'Thing' class is what every
>>>> other class inherits
>>>> properties from, so a Person, an Organization, a Book, a
>>>> Product, are all
>>>> Things.
>>>>
>>>> ~Richard.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08/11/2012 16:12, "Dawson, Laura"
>>>> <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is a fictional character a person or a thing?
>>>>
>>>> Oooh, philosophy! "What is the nature of a thing?"
>>>>
>>>> Laura Dawson
>>>> Product Manager, Identifiers
>>>> Bowker
>>>> laura.dawson@bowker.com
>>>> ________________________________________
>>>> From: Richard Wallis [richard.wallis@oclc.org]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 4:07 PM
>>>> To: Dawson, Laura; public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Itemprop for person
>>>>
>>>> The more I think about it, the more inclined I am to
>>>> suggest that this
>>>> is a suggested new property for 'Thing' - most any
>>>> type of thing you
>>>> describe could be fictional.
>>>>
>>>> ~Richard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08/11/2012 15:55, "Dawson, Laura"
>>>> <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I like this very much!
>>>>
>>>> Laura Dawson
>>>> Product Manager, Identifiers
>>>> Bowker
>>>> laura.dawson@bowker.com
>>>> ________________________________________
>>>> From: Richard Wallis [richard.wallis@oclc.org]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 3:48 PM
>>>> To: Dawson, Laura; public-schemabibex@w3.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Itemprop for person
>>>>
>>>> Interesting thought also applicable for
>>>> Organization (such as
>>>> Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry)
>>>>
>>>> ~Richard.
>>>>
>>>> On 08/11/2012 15:35, "Dawson, Laura"
>>>> <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Could we possibly add an ³isfictional² tag? To
>>>> identify characters
>>>> (such as Sherlock Holmes)? Some fictional
>>>> characters will eventually
>>>> have ISNIs and we¹ll need to structure data
>>>> around them.
>>>>
>>>> Laura Dawson
>>>> Product Manager, Identifiers
>>>> Bowker
>>>> Land: (908) 219-0082
>>>> Cell: (917) 770-6641
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2012 10:24:26 UTC