- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:54:52 -0700
- To: public-schemabibex@w3.org
I'm unclear on the proposed use of a SKOS-like addition to schema.org. My understanding of schema.org is that it is intended to make up for the fact that most web pages do not have any semantic mark-up, just HTML. Any vocabularies in SKOS already do have semantic mark-up. Are you anticipating that some sites would use schema.org *instead of* SKOS? Also, are you thinking that schema.org users would use this to define controlled vocabularies? kc On 10/16/12 12:33 PM, jean delahousse wrote: > > > 2012/10/16 jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com > <mailto:delahousse.jean@gmail.com>> > > Hi All, > > Any subject described in the classes of Schema.org (person, > organization, creative work, product, intangible...) can be > referenced in a controlled vocabulary with the specific formalism of > a controlled vocabulary and the specific relationships it allows > (broader, narrower, related and alignment relationships). The aim of > the controlled vocabulary description of the concept, is not to > descripe the subject itself, but to describe it as a "concept" in a > controlled vocabulary, describing a given set of subjects, which > someone wants to use to classify or describe something else. > > Administration and publication of a controlled vocabulary implies > some best practices and rules about concept definition, labels, life > of the concept.. which are the same for all class of subjects. > > So in my mind the concept description can double a description of > the subject as a person, a product, an event, in the same > publication. This would probably means to be able to describe a link > between the skos:concept page and the page about this subject, for > example between the concept of "Chicago" in the controlled > vocabulary, and a page describing Chicago as a place in the same web > site. > > So the objective here is not to describe subject which are not > actually described by Shema.org but to give a very oriented > "taxonomist" view on any possible subject. > As a matter of fact, my first tought was to add a class "concept" at > the upper level under Thing. This class would not have be exclusive > from belonging to any other class. > > Jean > > > 2012/10/16 jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com > <mailto:delahousse.jean@gmail.com>> > > Richard, > > I did publish a brief description a link on the uploaded copy of > the document. > > Jean > > > 2012/10/16 Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org > <mailto:richard.wallis@oclc.org>> > > Jean, > > Would you have any objection to your proposal being > published on the Group Wiki? > > If it is OK by you, you could append a brief description to > the Areas for Discussion page > <http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Areas_for_Discussion> > and link to an uploaded copy of the document. > > ~Richard. > > > > > On 16/10/2012 14:10, "Tami Ezra" > <Tami.Ezra@exlibrisgroup.com > <http://Tami.Ezra@exlibrisgroup.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > My name is Tami Ezra and I am a senior business analyst > at Ex Libris. > > I am interested in the proposal discussed below - would > it be possible to get a copy? > > Many thanks > > Tami > > > > *From:* Young,Jeff (OR) [mailto:jyoung@oclc.org] > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 16, 2012 3:24 AM > *To:* jean delahousse KC; public-schemabibex@w3.org > <http://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 > <http://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 > <http://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 > <http://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 > > > > > > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > delahousse.jean@gmail.com <mailto:delahousse.jean@gmail.com> - > +33 6 01 22 48 55 <tel:%2B33%206%2001%2022%2048%2055> - skype: > jean.delahousse -blog >contenus >données >sémantique > <http://jean-delahousse.net> - twitter.com/jdelahousse > <http://twitter.com/jdelahousse> > > > > > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > delahousse.jean@gmail.com <mailto:delahousse.jean@gmail.com> - +33 6 > 01 22 48 55 <tel:%2B33%206%2001%2022%2048%2055> - skype: > jean.delahousse -blog >contenus >données >sémantique > <http://jean-delahousse.net> - twitter.com/jdelahousse > <http://twitter.com/jdelahousse> > > > > > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > delahousse.jean@gmail.com <mailto:delahousse.jean@gmail.com> - +33 6 01 > 22 48 55 - skype: jean.delahousse -blog >contenus >données >sémantique > <http://jean-delahousse.net> - twitter.com/jdelahousse > <http://twitter.com/jdelahousse> > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2012 20:55:17 UTC