Re: Article Proposal

Currently it is still called Article, as that is the Wiki name - however I suggest we name it 'Periodicals, Articles, and Multi-volume Works' when we propose it.

I have updated the proposal to reflect the discussions:

  *   Added the proposal to move Blog under Periodical
  *   Tweaked description of PublicationVolume to mention periodical & multi-volume work
  *   Tweaked description of PublicationIssue to mention periodical & PublicationVolume
  *   Added a multi-volume work example in turtle

Question, do we need to add numberOfPages (used on Book) to PublicationVolume, PublicationIssue, and Article?  That would cover off standalone Articles and a fuller description of issues & volumes.

Hopefully, apart from agreeing my suggestion and my question, I think we are nearly there.  Would be great to get this proposed in the next few days.

~Richard

On 13 Dec 2013, at 17:19, Jeremy Nelson <Jeremy.Nelson@COLORADOCOLLEGE.EDU<mailto:Jeremy.Nelson@COLORADOCOLLEGE.EDU>> wrote:

+1 on realigning Blog under Periodical and letting discussion ensue. Recognizing Blog as a legitimate subclass of Periodical demonstrates our willingness to expand beyond traditional library categories.

Jeremy Nelson
Metadata and Systems Librarian
Colorado College

-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 9:28 AM
To: Adrian Pohl; Dan Scott; lindstream@gmail.com<mailto:lindstream@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Wallis; public-schemabibex@w3.org<mailto:public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Article Proposal



On 12/13/13, 1:09 AM, Adrian Pohl wrote:

- "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?

:-) No, something got lost. The original statement went on "...
intended... to continue indefinitely." It was cribbed from the definition in AACR2.


Relation between schema:Periodical and schema:Blog:
Currently, schema:Blog is located in the schema.org<http://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<http://wisspub.net> receiving an ISSN.[1])


I understand your statement about blogs, and to me it is factually correct, but I'm not sure the library "continuing resource" point of view would be well received. Perhaps we could suggest it as part of our proposal and see what the reaction is.

kc


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<mailto:denials@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Niklas Lindström
<lindstream@gmail.com<mailto: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



--
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet