Re: audiobook options in objects

Owen, I take your point: additionalType seems to be sub-typing 
CreativeWork, not adding information about the product. I vaguely recall 
having been warned about additionalType -- that it is not often used and 
seems to be tricky. Here's the definition of "aT":

"An additional type for the item, typically used for adding more 
specific types from external vocabularies in microdata syntax. This is a 
relationship between something and a class that the thing is in. In RDFa 
syntax, it is better to use the native RDFa syntax - the 'typeof' 
attribute - for multiple types. Schema.org tools may have only weaker 
understanding of extra types, in particular those defined externally."

Richard posted this in an email: [1]
"
Sticking with the Product Ontology approach for a moment ­ an audiobook 
in WMA on a cd would just be a combination of multiple types thus:
 > http://schema.org/Book
 > additionalType: http://www.productontology.org/id/Audiobook
 > additionalType: http://www.productontology.org/id/ Windows_Media_Audio
 > additionalType: http://www.productontology.org/id/ Compact_Disc
 >

First, I think that "/associatedMedia" in CreativeWork looks to be a 
better fit for this. It is defined as: "The media objects that encode 
this creative work. This property is a synonym for encodings."

Second, it still isn't clear, however, if you have multiple 
associatedMedia fields, e.g. A, B and C, whether that means that you 
have that CW in three different media, or if you have the CW in a single 
medium that is defined as A+B+C. I believe that Richard's example above 
was the latter. You seem to be concerned about encoding the former. 
Surely we need to be able to distinguish between them. I believe that 
means moving toward item or offer-level description for the different 
encodings. I can't think of any other way to make it clear.

kc


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/2013Feb/0020.html

 > Re: Content-Carrier Proposal
 > Sticking with the Product Ontology approach for a moment – an audiobook
 > in WMA on a cd would just be a combination of multiple types thus:
 >
 >     http://schema.org/Book
 >     additionalType: http://www.productontology.org/id/Audiobook
 >     additionalType: http://www.productontology.org/id/ 
Windows_Media_Audio
 >     additionalType: http://www.productontology.org/id/ Compact_Disc

On 2/9/13 10:57 AM, Owen Stephens wrote:
> To clarify - I don't have a problem with the use of additionalType
> generally or in declaring a creativeWork to also be a Product - it just
> seemed it didn't actually resolve the issue I described.
>
> But just feeling my way here so happy if I've misinterpreted how this
> can work
>
> Owen
>
> On 9 Feb 2013, at 18:21, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org
> <mailto:jyoung@oclc.org>> wrote:
>
>> Why so much concern about schema:additionalType and Microdata as
>> opposed to rdf:type and RDFa? This isn't an issue from the latter POV.
>> The thing is both types.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Feb 9, 2013, at 1:10 PM, "Owen Stephens" <owen@ostephens.com
>> <mailto:owen@ostephens.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks.  Will try to adjust proposal and modelling in this direction
>>>
>>> The example you've pointed at uses /Product as an 'additionaltype'
>>> which doesn't seem right to me - my inclination would be to propose a
>>> creative work can be associated with a product in someway.
>>>
>>> I see that creativeWork can have an 'offer' associated with it which
>>> seems counterintuitive - would be much nicer if this became a link to
>>> a product instead?
>>>
>>> Feel like my thinking is going round in circles :(
>>>
>>> Owen
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9 Feb 2013, at 16:05, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org
>>> <mailto:jyoung@oclc.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Owen,
>>>>
>>>> I think you're on the right track.
>>>>
>>>> I would argue that schema:CreativeWork should be used to represent
>>>> "content" and schema:Product be used to represent "carrier". FRBR
>>>> Manifestation is then an amalgamation of schema:CreativeWork and
>>>> schema:ProductModel. FRBR Item would be schema:CreativeWork and
>>>> schema:IndividualProduct. Our notion of "Holding" would be
>>>> schema:creativeWork and schema:SomeProducts.
>>>>
>>>> I believe that Richard started to mock up an example on the wiki.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Examples/mylib
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 9, 2013, at 10:42 AM, "Owen Stephens" <owen@ostephens.com
>>>> <mailto:owen@ostephens.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Re: audiobook options in objects
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking at this again I think what I feel most unhappy with the
>>>>> modelling I've done is:
>>>>>
>>>>> A) It treats something that is 16 CDs as essentially a single thing
>>>>> (says its a cd containing a 22hr CDDA encoded audio object
>>>>>
>>>>> B) It conflates the format (cd) with the creative work. This would
>>>>> make it awkward to code a page which listed the work then multiple
>>>>> access options (audio cd, mp3 on physical media, mp3 for download,
>>>>> ogg vorbis for download etc)
>>>>>
>>>>> If it were just multiple formats for download you could do this
>>>>> adequately using audioObject - but the mix in of physical media
>>>>> stops this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Being able to this kind of listing seems pretty fundamental -
>>>>> whether for a library or a store.
>>>>>
>>>>> It might be that this can be achieved by mixing in a
>>>>> schema.org/product? <http://schema.org/product?> This would make
>>>>> more sense - the cd set is a product, as is the physical media+mp3,
>>>>> as is the mp3 for download.
>>>>>
>>>>> However not quite sure how to model this right now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does my concern make sense?
>>>>> Anyone want to suggest how product would interact here?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I'm sticking to a pretty straightforward real world
>>>>> scenario here not just dreaming up an abstract concern?
>>>>>
>>>>> Owen
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9 Feb 2013, at 03:57, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
>>>>> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Great, owen. I'll work on proposal 2 since that seems to be the
>>>>> mostly likely one in my set. I'm not clear about repetition of
>>>>> property names in schema.org <http://schema.org> -- is it legit to
>>>>> have two schemas that both have a property "isbn"? I believe this
>>>>> was discussed either here or on the public-vocab list, and I was
>>>>> left with the impression that the URI pattern is
>>>>> >
>>>>> > http://schema.org/[property]
>>>>> >
>>>>> > and not
>>>>> >
>>>>> > http://schema.org/Book/[property]
>>>>> > http://schema.org/Audiobook/[property]
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Can anyone confirm? Because that would knock out a couple of the
>>>>> options that are currently on the page.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > kc
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On 2/8/13 3:46 PM, Owen Stephens wrote:
>>>>> >> OK - I've given markup a go for Proposal 5 - not done this
>>>>> before so likely be errors/misconceptions on my part so anyone
>>>>> should feel free to chip in and improve.
>>>>> >> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Object_Types#Proposal_5
>>>>> >> Owen
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Owen Stephens
>>>>> >> Owen Stephens Consulting
>>>>> >> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
>>>>> >> Email: owen@ostephens.com <mailto:owen@ostephens.com>
>>>>> >> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On 8 Feb 2013, at 18:01, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@KCOYLE.NET
>>>>> <mailto:kcoyle@KCOYLE.NET>> wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> So many choices! :-) Should the next step be to try to encode a
>>>>> few items and see how it works?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Also, the creativeWork "encoding" is *supposed* to be of type
>>>>> MediaObject. Does that make a difference?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> kc
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On 2/8/13 7:46 AM, Owen Stephens wrote:
>>>>> >>>> Hi Karen,
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> I'm inclined to ignore that definition of Media Object :)
>>>>> There is no reason why an Audio-book shouldn't be embedded in a
>>>>> webpage so I wouldn't want to exclude this either)
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> I think you could make use of the Creative Work property
>>>>> "encoding" rather than making it a type of Media Object - which
>>>>> allows some split of content and carrier? (not wishing to resurrect
>>>>> that discussion!)
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> This would allow:
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Proposal
>>>>> >>>> Thing > CreativeWork > Audiobook
>>>>> >>>> Thing > CreativeWork > Book > Audiobook
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> New properties for audiobook type
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>    • readBy -- expected type: Person
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Properties likely to be used from Book
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>    • bookEdition (for abridgement note)
>>>>> >>>>    • isbn
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> With a separate Media Object to be created and referenced
>>>>> using 'encoding' property from CreativeWork?
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> I've added as Proposal 4
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Owen
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Owen Stephens
>>>>> >>>> Owen Stephens Consulting
>>>>> >>>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
>>>>> >>>> Email: owen@ostephens.com <mailto:owen@ostephens.com>
>>>>> >>>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> On 8 Feb 2013, at 15:23, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
>>>>> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> I wrote up three options for audiobook:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Object_Types#AudioBook
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> A key question here is whether we can re-use MediaObject,
>>>>> since it is defined as being media embedded in a web page.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> kc
>>>>> >>>>> --
>>>>> >>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>>> >>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
>>>>> >>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>>> >>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>>> >>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> --
>>>>> >>> Karen Coyle
>>>>> >>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
>>>>> >>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>>> >>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>>> >>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Karen Coyle
>>>>> > kcoyle@kcoyle.net <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
>>>>> > ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>>> > m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>>> > skype: kcoylenet
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

Received on Saturday, 9 February 2013 20:09:44 UTC