Re: Article Proposal

Hello,

after not being able to follow the extensive discussions of the last
weeks (my apologies), I know found the time to taker a look at the
article proposal. Generally, I believe you did very good work there.
Thanks to all involved.

Below are some comments and questions I had when reading the proposal.

Wording: 
- "A publication in any medium issued in successive parts bearing
numerical or chronological designations and intended, such as a
magazine, scholarly journal, or newspaper" <- Is this actually a full
sentence? It seems to me that the end is missing. How about mentioning
more than these traditional kinds of periodical, e.g. webcomics or blogs
(see below).
- I miss "periodical" in the description of "New Type:
PublicationIssue", especially as it is mentioned in the description of
issueNumber. 
- It might cause confusion that PublicationIssue is explained as being
a "part of a successively published publication". As the isPartOf
relation of an Issue might point to a Volume - which I wouldn't think of
as "a successively published publication" - the relation to the
Periodical can only be an indirect one.

Relation between schema:Periodical and schema:Blog: 
Currently, schema:Blog is located in the schema.org hierarchy as
follows:  Thing > CreativeWork > Blog. I guess the proposal should
include moving schema:Blog to Thing > CreativeWork > Periodical > Blog.
This would also make sense regarding the property schema:issn that
belongs to schema:Periodical as some blogs actually have an ISSN. (I
just heard about the German blog wisspub.net receiving an ISSN.[1])

Examples:
- I would like to see another example for non-traditional periodicals
like a webcomic or a blog. I could provide that one myself if you want
to.

As I haven't been taking part in the discussion for the last weeks and
thus don't know whether you haven't already discussed some of these
issues, I hesitate to go ahead and edit the proposal. But I could do the
changes myself if you agree with a change proposal and if nobody else
adjusts the document accordingly.

All the best
Adrian

[1] See https://twitter.com/pampel/status/411128690828140544 and
http://wisspub.net/impressum/ .




>>> On 13.12.2013 at 5:20, Dan Scott <denials@gmail.com> wrote: 
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Niklas Lindström
<lindstream@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello again,
>>
>> The microdata is now fixed in the following ways:
>>
>> * corrected some itemtype values, which microdata requires to be
full URLs
>> (unlike RDFa, which can use @vocab to avoid repetition)
>> * the items are linked together using isPartOf
>> * the same entities are described throughout (instead of six
disjoint
>> entities), using @itemid
>>
>> I used @itemid this time, since at least microdata parsers producing
RDF get
>> the data right. Unfortunately, @itemid is (also) required to be a
full URL
>> in microdata, and it is only allowed if both itemscope and itemtype
are also
>> present. It's either that or using @itemref, which as I showed
earlier [1]
>> is also somewhat cumbersome (it requires you to sprinkle in @id and
glue
>> items together from disparate parts). Though if anyone more versed
in
>> microdata can clean it up, please do.
>>
>> I also added an RDFa version (which I find to be less verbose). I
really
>> recommend to paste that into RDFa Play [2].
>>
>> The examples are verified (using RDFLib) to produce the also added
Turtle
>> example (minus some web page related details).
>>
>> (Apart from considering the weight of the markup (which gets heavy
with this
>> much granularity in once place), the Turtle is what I usually focus
on when
>> I reason about the merits and flaws of various properties, types and
uses
>> thereof.)
> 
> Awesome, thanks for fixing this up, Niklas! I was enjoying a visit
> with Santa at our local public library. Well, my kids enjoyed it too
> :)
> 
>> I also added a variant with less verbose precision (but using the
same
>> properties of course): just an Article linked to a PeriodicalIssue
(skipping
>> the volume and periodical). Notice that name, volumeNumber and issn
is used
>> on the PeriodicalIssue, indicating that those are, scruffily,
"inherited"
>> from the collections above. That's the kind of flexibility I believe
we're
>> after.
> 
> Hmm. I think that might be _too_ scruffy; that example hangs the
issn,
> volumeNumber, and periodical name off of PublicationIssue, which is
> not valid according to the proposal that we're putting forward, and
> therefore wouldn't be expected to be parsed correctly by the search
> engines, right? (I took a quick stab at sorting it out but then
> realized that the result was going to pretty much mirror the core
> example...).
> 
> Thanks,
> Dan

Received on Friday, 13 December 2013 09:10:53 UTC