- From: Shlomo Sanders <Shlomo.Sanders@exlibrisgroup.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:51:17 +0000
- To: Laura Dawson <ljndawson@gmail.com>, Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- CC: "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Can we get back what to about an identifier like urn:nbn:ch:bel-9039 where there is no URI? Thanks, Shlomo Sent from my iPad On Jan 16, 2013, at 19:37, "Laura Dawson" <ljndawson@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 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 draftı 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 17:52:28 UTC