Re: Some Draft SchemaBibEx Proposals

Seems like it would be pretty easy to set this up. I'll put it on the
roadmap - and ignore the lectures from the development team about how I'm
not paying attention to revenue-producing projects.

On 1/16/13 12:27 PM, "Richard Wallis" <richard.wallis@oclc.org> wrote:

>Description of an isbn:
>    name (characters that make up the number): 093738318X
>    type (the numbering scheme it is in): ISBN
>    issuing authority: Bowker
>    issue date: 1997
>    assigned to: http://www.bookwire.com/9780985887025
>
>OR using the SKOS proposal:
>
><http://bowker.com/identifiers/isbn/9780553479430>
>    a skos:Concept;
>    schema:name "093738318X";
>    schema:inScheme <http://bowker.com/concept-scheme/isbn> ;
>    schema:focus <http://www.bookwire.com/9780985887025>.
>
>Markup of the concept-scheme could, in this model, provide information
>about
>the issuing authority.  Not sure yet how I would map the issue date
>property
>
>~Richard.
>
>On 16/01/2013 17:14, "Laura Dawson" <ljndawson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Good point.
>> 
>> When you say "description of the number" - could you give an example?
>> 
>> On 1/16/13 12:03 PM, "Richard Wallis" <richard.wallis@oclc.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Is the Bookwire page not a description of the book (that happens to
>>>have
>>> that isbn allocated to it) not a description of the number itself?
>>> ~Richard.
>>> 
>>> On 16/01/2013 16:56, "Laura Dawson" <ljndawson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> We do, actually - we just make a different URL available publicly for
>>>> SEO
>>>> purposes. It's not on Bowker.com - it's on a site called Bookwire.
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.bookwire.com/9780985887025 is an example. It's an alias for
>>>> http://www.bookwire.com/The-Twelve-9780985887025.html.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 1/16/13 11:49 AM, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I admit that I always have trouble with the re-working of ontologies
>>>>>to
>>>>> new uses (like using dcterms:title for a person's name, which is
>>>>>legit
>>>>> but always rubs me the wrong way). In the SKOS case, I just can't see
>>>>> an
>>>>> identifier as a skos:concept. Also, if Bowker *did* provide a URI for
>>>>> ISBNs (and I think that's being discussed but is not yet realized)
>>>>>then
>>>>> I see no need for the identifier structure in schema. It is needed
>>>>>for
>>>>> those instances where there is no URI. (But, Jeff, maybe that's just
>>>>>an
>>>>> artifact of your example?)
>>>>> 
>>>>> kc
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 1/15/13 11:07 PM, Shlomo Sanders wrote:
>>>>>> I looked at both. They seem to be equivalent with the SKOS being
>>>>>> cleaner
>>>>>> and also based on only one new construct: SKOS.
>>>>>> Personally, I think the name attribute in the SKOS is a misleading
>>>>>> attribute label for at text key value.
>>>>>> If I had to choose between name and prefLabel I would prefer the
>>>>>> latter
>>>>>> (though that is also misleading too but better than name).
>>>>>> How does this work for?
>>>>>> schema:identifier <urn:nbn:ch:bel-9039>;
>>>>>> In the SKOS part itself, is the do the inSchema and focus need to be
>>>>>> working URIs with something behind it?
>>>>>> <http://bowker.com/identifiers/isbn/9780553479430>
>>>>>>      a skos:Concept;
>>>>>>      schema:name "9780553479430";
>>>>>>      schema:inScheme <http://bowker.com/concept-scheme/isbn> ;
>>>>>>      schema:focus <http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/38264520>.
>>>>>> Shlomo
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Young,Jeff (OR) [mailto:jyoung@oclc.org]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 20:05
>>>>>> To: Shlomo Sanders; Wallis,Richard; Karen Coyle; Gordon Dunsire
>>>>>> Cc: public-schemabibex@w3.org; Vizine-Goetz,Diane
>>>>>> Subject: RE: Some Draft SchemaBibEx Proposals
>>>>>> There was some discussion of Richard's Identifier Proposal during
>>>>>> today's call, so I wanted to clarify my comments.
>>>>>> My observation was that the key patterns in Richard's "Identifier
>>>>>> Proposal" mirror patterns found in SKOS. I added a section to the
>>>>>> proposal so they can be compared side-by-side:
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Identifier#Proposal
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Identifier#Alternate_Pro
>>>>>>po
>>>>>> se
>>>>>> d_based_on_SKOS
>>>>>> If Schema.org adopts the essence of SKOS (which they should if
>>>>>>they're
>>>>>> serious about wanting to externalize lists), then Richard's Proposal
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> be modeled as a specialization of that:
>>>>>> schema:Identifier rdfs:subClassOf schema:Concept .
>>>>>> schema:inStandard rdfs:subPropertyOf schema:inScheme .
>>>>>> schema:identifies rdfs:subPropertyOf schema:focus .
>>>>>> I'm skeptical that Schema.org will care about explicitly modeling
>>>>>> "identifiers for identifiers" like this, but I won't object if the
>>>>>> group
>>>>>> wants to try.
>>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Shlomo Sanders [mailto:Shlomo.Sanders@exlibrisgroup.com]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 1:30 AM
>>>>>>> To: Wallis,Richard; Karen Coyle; Gordon Dunsire
>>>>>>> Cc: public-schemabibex@w3.org; Young,Jeff (OR); Vizine-Goetz,Diane
>>>>>>> Subject: RE: Some Draft SchemaBibEx Proposals
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> "So, in my draft I was intending the URI would identify (link to)
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>> description of a [standard] identifier."
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This seems convoluted and not KISS.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Richard Wallis [mailto:richard.wallis@oclc.org]
>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 22:12
>>>>>>> To: Karen Coyle; Gordon Dunsire
>>>>>>> Cc: public-schemabibex@w3.org; 'Young,Jeff (OR)';
>>>>>>>Vizine-Goetz,Diane
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Some Draft SchemaBibEx Proposals
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Gordon,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As Karen mentions, Schema.org purposely avoids the strict
>>>>>>>definition
>>>>>>> of domains and ranges and (as I would put it) 'hopes' to find the
>>>>>>> Expected Type as a property but it is also acceptable to find a
>>>>>>> string
>>>>>>> representation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The 'identifier' property I describe in the draft is stretching
>>>>>>> schema.org documentation style a little, by adding in an order of
>>>>>>> preference to the Expected Type.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You are correct that a URI could be an identifier but the meaning I
>>>>>>> was hoping for in this case was that the identifier in question
>>>>>>>would
>>>>>>> be a [Standard] Identifier.  Hence the examples of ISSN, ISNI, etc.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> However I omitted the word 'standard' so as not to restrict the use
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> only identifiers produced by standards bodies.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So, in my draft I was intending the URI would identify (link to)
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>> description of a [standard] identifier.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I perhaps need to work a little on my descriptive text - all
>>>>>>> suggestions welcome!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ~Richard.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 06/01/2013 18:01, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
>>>>>>> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 1/6/13 8:27 AM, Gordon Dunsire wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> In the Identifier proposal, the value of the schema.identifier
>>>>>>>>> property includes URIs.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 1. Assuming that schema.org Type is a synonym for RDF Class (or
>>>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>>> I wrong?), what does this mean for the range of the identifier?
>>>>>>>>>Is
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> literal, as in the "urn:nbn:ch:bel-9039" example, or a class, as
>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>> the <examplelib.org/identifier/12345> example, which is an
>>>>>>> individual
>>>>>>>>> member of the class?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I believe that schema.org is purposely avoiding the strict
>>>>>>>> definition of domains and ranges. As it says in the documentation:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> "The decision to allow multiple domains and ranges was purely
>>>>>>> pragmatic.
>>>>>>>> While the computational properties of systems with a single domain
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> range are easier to understand, in practice, this forces the
>>>>>>>> creation of a lot of artifical types, which are there purely to
>>>>>>>>act
>>>>>>>> as the domain/range of some properties. "
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 2. Using the example, is it not true to say in ttl:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/38264520> schema.identifier
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/38264520> .?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> If so, <http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/38264520> is both a
>>>>>>>>> schema.Book and a schema.Identifier Š
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If the two (schema.Book and schema.Identifier) are not disjoint,
>>>>>>>> does it matter?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> kc
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Gordon
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> *From:*Richard Wallis[mailto:richard.wallis@oclc.org]
>>>>>>> <mailto:[mailto:richard.wallis@oclc.org]>
>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* 03 January 2013 12:36
>>>>>>>>> *To:*public-schemabibex@w3.org <mailto:public-schemabibex@w3.org>
>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* Young,Jeff (OR); Vizine-Goetz,Diane
>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Some Draft SchemaBibEx Proposals
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I have pulled some of our thoughts and discussions together into
>>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>> couple of draft vocabulary proposals.  They can be found on the
>>>>>>>>> Wiki
>>>>>>>>> here:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>><http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Vocabulary_Proposals>.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> These are most definitely Œdraft¹ proposals and are there as a
>>>>>>>>> foundation for us to work on.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I am not precious about any of the Type or Property names I have
>>>>>>>>> used, or any of the descriptive text either.  If you have better
>>>>>>>>> suggestions, dive in and share!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I have included some example RDF ­ I will add some RDFa and
>>>>>>>>> possibly other format examples later.  I am holding off for a few
>>>>>>>>> days on this, as I am in discussion with the W3C hosting people
>>>>>>>>> about adding a syntax highlighting extension added to the Wiki
>>>>>>>>> which will make code examples far more readable.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>       Richard.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2013 17:37:10 UTC