Re: First draft minimalist periodical/article proposal

Karen, Jeff,

Yes and yes. :) I certainly agree that if partOf is acceptable for all, it
is the simpler choice. I got the impression though that we were not in
agreement there (and that the favorite was to use the specific one). And
part of that was that schema.org already has such partOfFoos growing here
and there (e.g. in Episode).

In any case, we need a "part of" relation between the article and the
periodical. (And probably a reverse relation, since @rev isn't liked by
everyone; and since in some cases the workflow does go from container to
contained.)

(The articles here, having paginations, are intrinsically parts of
something paged – otherwise the pagination property wouldn't be very useful
(just numberOfPages would do).)

By the way: it seems that the headlines in the wiki page are a bit off. The
section under "Intangible" really should be for Article, right? And the
"Thing > CreativeWork > Article" section seems to specify the addition of
the Periodical class.

Cheers,
Niklas



On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org> wrote:

> The world is full of whole/part relationships. With this approach, won't
> Schema.org be overwhelmed by custom partOfFoo properties where the range
> Foo classname is encoded in the property name?
>
> Jeff
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Dec 8, 2013, at 6:13 PM, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Niklas -
> >
> > So you are suggesting that we need partOfPeriodical to make this work
> smoothly? And that would be a new property in Article? If I understand that
> correctly, we would then have:
> >
> > Article
> >
> > adds:
> > * partOfPeriodical
> >   - type: Periodical
> >
> > kc
> >
> >> On 12/8/13, 1:42 PM, Niklas Lindström wrote:
> >> Hi Karen,
> >>
> >> Great! I did two variants of the article example, inlined below. In
> >> these, the items are linked (using our suggested partOfPeriodical). They
> >> also overcome a problem with the current version in the wiki, which
> >> describes four separate items (two articles and two periodicals).
> >>
> >> The first is in RDFa, and uses @resource to identify the article and
> >> periodical:
> >>
> >> - - - 8< - - -
> >>
> >>   <div vocab="http://schema.org/" typeof="Article">
> >>     <strong>Title:</strong><span property="name"> Be Careful What You
> >> Wish For: FRBR, Some Lacunae, A Review</span><br />
> >>     <strong>Author:</strong> <span property="author">Smiraglia,
> >> Richardp.</span><br />
> >>     <strong>Subjects:</strong> <span property="subject">Catalog</span>
> >> ; <span property="subject">Works</span> <br />
> >>     <strong>Is Part Of:</strong>
> >>     <div property="partOfPeriodical" typeof="Periodical"
> resource="#pdl">
> >>       <span property="name">Cataloging &amp; Classification
> >> Quarterly</span>,
> >>       <span property="datePublished">2012</span>,
> >>       Vol.<span property="volumeNumber">50</span>(<span
> >> property="issueNumber">5</span>),</div><div>
> >>     p.<span property="pagination">360-368</span> [Peer Reviewed
> >> Journal]<br />
> >>     <strong>Description:</strong> <span property="description">The
> >> library catalog as a catalog of works was an infectious idea, which
> >> together with research led to reconceptualization in the form of the
> >> FRBR conceptual model. Two categories of lacunae emerge—the expression
> >> entity, and gaps in the model such as aggregates and dynamic documents.
> >> Evidence needed to extend the FRBR model is available in contemporary
> >> research on instantiation. The challenge for the bibliographic community
> >> is to begin to think of FRBR as a form of knowledge organization system,
> >> adding a final dimension to classification. The articles in the present
> >> special issue offer a compendium of the promise of the FRBR
> >> model.</span></div><br />
> >>     <div resource="#pdl"><strong>Publisher:</strong>
> >>       <span property="publisher">Taylor &amp; Francis Group</span><br />
> >>       <strong>Source:</strong> Routledge, Taylor &amp; Francis Group<br
> />
> >>       <strong>ISSN:</strong> <span property="issn">0163-9374</span> ;
> >>       <strong>E-ISSN:</strong> <span property="issn">1544-4554</span>
> >> ;</div>
> >>     <strong>DOI:</strong> <a
> >> href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.682254"
> >> property="url">10.1080/01639374.2012.682254</a>
> >>   </div>
> >>
> >> - - - >8 - - -
> >>
> >> Check this out in <http://rdfa.info/play/> to see the data in action.
> >>
> >> The other is an attempt to use @itemref in microdata to do the same
> thing:
> >>
> >> - - - 8< - - -
> >>
> >>   <div>
> >>     <span itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Article"
> >> itemref="partof details">
> >>       <strong>Title:</strong><span itemprop="name"> Be Careful What You
> >> Wish For: FRBR, Some Lacunae, A Review</span><br />
> >>       <strong>Author:</strong> <span itemprop="author">Smiraglia,
> >> Richardp.</span><br />
> >>       <strong>Subjects:</strong> <span
> >> itemprop="subject">Catalog</span> ; <span
> >> itemprop="subject">Works</span> <br />
> >>       <strong>Is Part Of:</strong>
> >>     </span>
> >>     <div id="partof" itemprop="partOfPeriodical" itemscope
> >> itemtype="http://schema.org/Periodical" itemref="publ">
> >>       <span itemprop="name">Cataloging &amp; Classification
> >> Quarterly</span>,
> >>       <span itemprop="datePublished">2012</span>,
> >>       Vol.<span itemprop="volumeNumber">50</span>(<span
> >> itemprop="issueNumber">5</span>),</div><div id="details">
> >>     p.<span itemprop="pagination">360-368</span> [Peer Reviewed
> >> Journal]<br />
> >>     <strong>Description:</strong> <span itemprop="description">The
> >> library catalog as a catalog of works was an infectious idea, which
> >> together with research led to reconceptualization in the form of the
> >> FRBR conceptual model. Two categories of lacunae emerge—the expression
> >> entity, and gaps in the model such as aggregates and dynamic documents.
> >> Evidence needed to extend the FRBR model is available in contemporary
> >> research on instantiation. The challenge for the bibliographic community
> >> is to begin to think of FRBR as a form of knowledge organization system,
> >> adding a final dimension to classification. The articles in the present
> >> special issue offer a compendium of the promise of the FRBR
> >> model.</span></div><br />
> >>     <div id="publ"><strong>Publisher:</strong>
> >>       <span itemprop="publisher">Taylor &amp; Francis Group</span><br />
> >>       <strong>Source:</strong> Routledge, Taylor &amp; Francis Group<br
> />
> >>       <strong>ISSN:</strong> <span itemprop="issn">0163-9374</span> ;
> >>       <strong>E-ISSN:</strong> <span itemprop="issn">1544-4554</span>
> >> ;</div>
> >>     <strong>DOI:</strong> <a
> >> href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.682254"
> >> itemprop="url">10.1080/01639374.2012.682254</a>
> >>   </div>
> >>
> >> - - - >8 - - -
> >>
> >> This one became a bit more cumbersome, since @itemref is more tricky to
> >> use when markup is interweaved like this.
> >>
> >> (Granted, I am more acquainted with RDFa (unsurprisingly, being a member
> >> of the RDFa 1.1 WG). And I readily admit to favor the @resource
> >> mechanism in RDFa over @itemref in microdata. So I may have overlooked
> >> some trick to make it work better. There is also @itemid, which in
> >> theory is analogous to @resource. But I'm not sure whether it is good
> >> practice, or even valid, to use it repeatedly in the same manner.)
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Niklas
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> >> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >>    All,
> >>
> >>    Since there was interest I went ahead and did a first draft of a
> >>    minimalist proposal. I believe I have designed it such that, given
> >>    the flat nature of schema.org <http://schema.org>, it does not
> >>    preclude the more complete proposal offered by Dan.
> >>
> >>
> http://www.w3.org/community/__schemabibex/wiki/Periodical___Article_minimal
> >>    <
> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Periodical_Article_minimal>
> >>
> >>    I did the examples there, and what with my limited coding skills,
> >>    you should expect to find (and feel free to fix) errors. Hopefully
> >>    the examples actually exemplify the proposal. At least, that was my
> >>    intention. I'll do more validation and testing of them if I find
> time.
> >>
> >>    All suggestions, comments, corrections welcome.
> >>
> >>    kc
> >>    --
> >>    Karen Coyle
> >>    kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
> >>    m: 1-510-435-8234 <tel:1-510-435-8234>
> >>    skype: kcoylenet
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Karen Coyle
> > kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> > m: 1-510-435-8234
> > skype: kcoylenet
> >
>
>