RE: Next Meeting - Schema Bib Extend W3C Group - 17th October

All

 

To clarify:

 

frbrer:Concept is a grab-bag, best defined as “a subject which is not a
Work, Expression, Manifestation, Item, Corporate Body, Family, Person,
Event, Object, or Place”. It comes from traditional models of authority
control, where typically there are separate files for corporate bodies,
persons/families, places, etc. The FRBR “subject” entities thus reflect a
particular way of categorizing subject topics at high level. This idea is
demolished by FRSAD, which declines to favour any such categorizations. As a
result, RDA has decided not to specify any specific KOS for “subjects”. And
the current view of the FRBR Review Group, which is consolidating the three
FR models, is that FRBR Group 3 should be labelled as just one set of
categories which is not part of the model; this is not a final view, and
should not be taken to be official policy.

 

In fact, FRSAD basically says that any Thing can be a Thema (subject topic):
frsad:Thema owl:sameAs owl:Thing.

 

Cheers

 

Gordon

 

From: Young,Jeff (OR) [mailto:jyoung@oclc.org] 
Sent: 16 October 2012 02:24
To: jean delahousse KC; public-schemabibex@w3.org
Subject: RE: Next Meeting - Schema Bib Extend W3C Group - 17th October

 

Jean,

 

I like where this is heading. In the experimental WorldCat.org Linked Data
so far (online RDFa and bulk N-Triples) I used skos:Concept for these
situations. In my dev environment, though, I started the switch to
schema:Intangible but wasn’t entirely happy with it. This proposal is much
more satisfying.

 

One issue comes to mind for discussion, though. This proposed schema:Concept
feels more equivalent to FRBR Concept than it does to skos:Concept. The
difference is subtle but real, IMO, and has to do with foaf:focus (with a
range of “Thing” and inverse of madsrdf:isIdentifiedByAuthority) being a
meaningful property for the latter (skos:Concept) but not the former (FRBR
Concept). VIAF (which doesn’t currently attempt to identify FRBR Concepts)
is probably the best illustration of the issues involved.

 

I realize that schema:Concept is destined to be a compromise, but it would
be nice (albeit perhaps not necessary) if this group had a clear
understanding and articulation of those compromises to minimize confusion in
industrial-strength use cases. 

 

Jeff

 

From: delahousse.jean@gmail.com [mailto:delahousse.jean@gmail.com] On Behalf
Of jean delahousse KC
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 10:13 AM
To: public-schemabibex@w3.org
Subject: Re: Next Meeting - Schema Bib Extend W3C Group - 17th October

 

Hi all,

 

First I want to thank you for accepting my application to participate to
your work group.

 

I had been working this summer on an extension of Schema.org for controlled
vocabularies based on Skos ontology. After BnF published Rameau in the LOD
but also as web pages, one for each concept, I thought it will be useful to
have an extension of Schema.org to make concepts defined in controlled
vocabularies more visible by search engines. 

Concepts are good candidates for TopicPages, and work as hub to access well
annotated contents or others Topic Pages. They are a valuable asset for
content / knowledge access from a search engine. 

 

Also it happens to find "glossary", "terminology" or "lexicon" in a web
site. This extension of Schema.org will enable to describe those types of
publication.

 

I took the initiative of this work but immediately ask for support and
review work to Antoine Isaac and Romain Weinz. They have been very
encouraging and already proposed corrections included in this version.

 

You'll find attached the proposal for the Skos Schema.org extension, we made
it as simple and light as possible. 

 

I propose, if the group agrees, to have a first discussion on this proposal
inside our group before to publish it for a larger audience..

 

Best regards

 

Talk to you on Thursday.

 

Jean Delahousse

2012/10/10 Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>

Hi All,

It is about time we followed up on the excellent first meeting we had.

I have scheduled conference call time for 11:00am EDT next Wednesday 17th
October for us to start to talk through some of the issues and suggestions
we discussed last time.

You will find call in details and a provisional agenda on the group wiki
here: http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Meet_20121017

If you have suggestions for the agenda, either edit the wiki or drop me a
line.

Regards,
    Richard.

--  
Richard Wallis
Technology Evangelist
OCLC





 

-- 

______________________________________________________________

KnowledgeConsult, Directeur Associé

blog  <http://jean-delahousse.net> >contenus >données >sémantique -
<http://twitter.com/jdelahousse> twitter.com/jdelahousse 

jean.delahousse@knowledgeconsult.com  +33 (0)6-01-22-48-55 skype:
jean.delahousse