RE: Some Draft SchemaBibEx Proposals

Would this be valid ?

    <span itemprop="code" itemscope  itemtype="http://schema.org/MedicalCode"   itemid="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D02.078.370.141.450" content="D02.078.370.141.450"/>

Thanks,
Shlomo

Experience the all-new, singing and dancing interactive Primo brochure. Click here<http://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/>


_____________________________________________
From: Adrian Pohl [mailto:pohl@hbz-nrw.de]
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 15:56
To: public-schemabibex@w3.org
Subject: Re: Some Draft SchemaBibEx Proposals


Having another look around schema.org; I noticed that something very similar to Richard's identifier proposal already exists in the health/medical extensions to schema.org. [1] It is used for expressing the medical code for an entity in microdata. Examples can be found at [2], [3] and [4]. I paste part of [4] into the mail:

<span itemprop="about" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Drug">
    <span itemprop="name">Metformin</span>
    <span itemprop="code" itemscope  itemtype="http://schema.org/MedicalCode"   itemid="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D02.078.370.141.450">
      <!-- Note: use of itemid is not mandatory, but recommended when an       external enumeration is available -->
      <meta itemprop="code" content="D02.078.370.141.450"/>
      <meta itemprop="codingSystem" content="MeSH"/>
    </span>

Some of Richard's proposed properties can be translated to this approach:

name --> code
identifier --> code
inStandard --> codingSystem

Of course, this couldn't be used out of the box and the naming ('code' vs. 'identifier') isn't the same. But, generally  I don't think that there is a significant difference between a code for a disease or a drug and an identifier for a CreativeWork. I assume, it would be a good approach to pick up the medical approach and extend it to other domains than to come up with a new proposal.

(I also put this onto the wiki page at [5].)

All the best
Adrian

[1] Documentation: http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html

[2] http://schema.org/MedicalCondition

[3] http://schema.org/MedicalScholarlyArticle

[4] http://schema.org/MedicalGuideline

[5] http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Identifier

>>> On 16.1.2013 at 20:09, Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org<mailto:richard.wallis@oclc.org>> wrote:
> Tom,
> On 16/01/2013 18:43, "Tom Morris" <tfmorris@gmail.com<mailto:tfmorris@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>> It probably belongs to a block of identifiers of a certain size which
>> may have a history of ownership transfer and an expiration date and
>> all sorts of other administrivial detail, but surely that's of
>> vanishingly small interest to someone who's just trying to uniquely
>> identify a book (edition).
>>
>> Note also that schema.org's Product.gtin13 property includes all
>> ISBN-13 codes (and ISBN-10 codes which have been translated).
>>
>
> In a few cases - Book:isbn & Product:gtin13 - Schema has accounted for
> standard numbers/references.  However this approach will not scale for
> all the many schemes that are used to assign these things.
>
> I am suggesting that there is a need for a way to describe a standard
> number/reference/identifier its type and any other useful information
> associated with it.
>
> I believe it has broad relevance beyond the bibliographic community.
>
> Richard.