- From: Thomas Adamich <vls@tusco.net>
- Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 14:42:21 -0400
- To: corey.harper@nyu.edu, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: public-schemabibex@w3.org
- Message-Id: <67f04ca05e96606e3e631b6568f4ec94de4f4cf4@mail.myomnicity.com>
Then refer to Jeff's vocabulary (albeit simplistic as it is) and the URI as the location. In that case, an ebook is what it is, and the location is in a familiar web-friendly format. Tom Tom Adamich, MLS President Visiting Librarian Service P.O. Box 932 New Philadelphia, OH 44663 330-364-4410 vls@tusco.net [1] ----- Original Message ----- From: corey.harper@nyu.edu To:"Karen Coyle" Cc: Sent:Fri, 5 Jul 2013 13:57:34 -0400 Subject:Re: Kill the Record! (Was: BIBFRAME and schema.org) Hi Karen, Can you say a bit more about "I'm not convinced, having looked at some of the pages, that WP shares the conceptual model that we'll find in our data."? I'm not sure I understand what problems you foresee, nor what you believe the ramifications of those problems to be. I struggle with the idea that "..we then need to develop some best practices for library data, knowing that non-library data will take its own direction." I'm rather averse to maintaining our own little, non-conforming corner of the Web without a really clear understanding of the impact--on users--of this perceived conceptual incompatibility. Thanks,-Corey On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: Yes, Jeff, I realize that. I had rather hoped for a link that you had found useful for books, like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Books_by_type [3] Naturally, this is a mish-mosh of physical types (paperback), product types (mass-market paperback), genres (airport novel) and topics (book size). I don't know if there is a better approach within WP. While it is great that these Wikipedia pages exist, I think before using them we should look beyond their titles to the content of the pages to make sure that WP and our metadata are talking about the same thing. I'm not convinced, having looked at some of the pages, that WP shares the conceptual model that we'll find in our data. With that as a starting point, we then need to develop some best practices for library data, knowing that non-library data will take its own direction. I would like to hear from anyone in the publishing community about their needs for specification of product types. I assume that the preferred list would original in ONIX. kc On 7/5/13 8:50 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote: You can think of the option like this: Anything in Wikipedia can be treated as an owl:Class by changing the URI prefix. For example, this Wikipedia page describes murals: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mural [4] In contrast, you can say something *is* a mural by using this hacked URI in an rdf:type: http://www.productontology.org/id/Mural [5] Jeff Sent from my iPad On Jul 5, 2013, at 11:42 AM, "Karen Coyle" wrote: What are the options provided by productontology? kc On 7/5/13 8:26 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote: True. This list has always seemed simplistic to me, though. As you've suggested, EBook in particular deserves to be treated as a class so more detailed properties can be included. The other two are just the tip if the iceberg. Sent from my iPad On Jul 5, 2013, at 11:20 AM, "Karen Coyle" wrote: Note that schema.org [10] has http://schema.org/BookFormatType [12], which has Ebook Hardback Paperback kc On 7/5/13 7:43 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote: For paperbacks and similar things, I've started using Product Ontology to tag the item/manifestation descriptions for example: @prefix schema: . @prefix pto: . :book1 a schema:Book, schema:ProductModel, pto:Paperback ; etc. The coverage isn't perfect, but it has the advantage of being backed up by Wikipedia. Jeff Sent from my iPad On Jul 5, 2013, at 10:35 AM, "Ross Singer" wrote: On Jul 5, 2013, at 10:25 AM, "Young,Jeff (OR)" wrote: Aside, I would argue that the defining characteristic of Item is that it has "location". For physical items that location can be determined by geolocation (for example). For Web items (aka Web documents), the location can be determined by its URL. +1 I would say there are arguably more defining characteristics than that (I'm still going to argue that "paperback" isn't actually a part of the manifestation, simply an inference of the sum of the format of the items), but this, I would argue, is definitely the least common denominator and applies well for our entity model in schema.org [21] . -Ross. Jeff Sent from my iPad On Jul 5, 2013, at 9:55 AM, "Ross Singer" wrote: But this all really how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, isn't it? We've already established that we're not interested in defining any strict interpretation of FRBR in schema.org [27] : we're just trying to define a way to describe things in HTML that computers can parse. Yes, I think we need to establish what an item is, no I don't think we have to use FRBR as a strict guide. -Ross. On Jul 5, 2013, at 8:51 AM, James Weinheimer wrote: On 05/07/2013 13:30, Ross Singer wrote: I guess I don't understand why offering epub, pdf, and html versions of the same resource doesn't constitute "items". If you look at an article in arxiv.org [33] , for example, where else in WEMI would you put the available file formats? Basically, format should be tied to the item, although for physical items, any manifestation's item will generally be the same format (although I don't see why a scan of a paperback would become a new endeavor, honestly). In the end, I don't see how digital is any different than print in this regard. Because manifestations are defined by their format (among other things). Therefore, a movie of, e.g. Moby Dick that is a videocassette is considered to be a different manifestation from that of a DVD. Each one is described separately. So, if you have multiple copies of the same format for the same content those are called copies. But if you have different formats for the same content, those are different manifestations. The examples in arxiv.org [36] are just like I mentioned in archive.org [39] and they follow a different sort of structure. You do not see this in a library catalog, where each format will get a different manifestation, so that each format can be described. As a result, things work quite differently. Look for e.g. Moby Dick in Worldcat, and you will see all kinds of formats available in the left-hand column. https://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=worldcat_org_all&q=moby+dick [42] When you click on an individual record, http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/62208367 [43] you will see where all of the copies of this particular format of this particular expression are located. This is the manifestation. And its purpose is to organize all of the *copies*, as is done here. In the IA, we see something different: http://archive.org/details/mobydickorwhale02melvuoft [44], where this display brings together the different manifestations: pdf, text, etc. There is no corresponding concept in FRBR for what we see in the Internet Archive, or in arxiv.org [45] . I am not complaining or finding fault, but what I am saying is that the primary reason this sort of thing works for digital materials is because there are no real "duplicates". (There are other serious problems that I won't mention here) In my opinion, introducing the Internet Archive-type structure into a library-type catalog based on physical materials with multitudes of copies would result in a completely incoherent hash. This is why I am saying that FRBR does not translate well to digital materials on the internet. Getting rid of the concept of the "record" has been the supposed remedy, but it seems to me that the final result (i.e. what the user will experience) will still be the incoherent mash I mentioned above: where innumerable items and multiple manifestations will be mashed together. Perhaps somebody could come up with a way to make this coherent and useful, but I have never seen anything like it and cannot imagine how it could work. -- *James Weinheimer* weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com [48] *First Thus* http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ [50] *First Thus Facebook Page* https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus [51] *Cooperative Cataloging Rules* http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ [52] *Cataloging Matters Podcasts* http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html [53] -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net [54] http://kcoyle.net [56] ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net [57] http://kcoyle.net [59] ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net [60] http://kcoyle.net [61] ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet -- Corey A Harper Metadata Services Librarian New York University Libraries 20 Cooper Square, 3rd Floor New York, NY 10003-7112 212.998.2479 corey.harper@nyu.edu [62] ------------------------- Email sent using webmail from Omnicity Links: ------ [1] mailto:vls@tusco.net [2] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Books_by_type [4] http://en.wikipediaorg/wiki/Mural [5] http://www.productontology.org/id/Mural [6] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [7] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [8] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [9] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [10] http://schema.org [11] http://schema.org [12] http://schema.org/BookFormatType [13] http://schema.org/ [14] http://www.productontology.org/id/ [15] mailto:rxs@talis.com [16] mailto:rxs@talis.com [17] mailto:rxs@talis.com [18] mailto:jyoung@oclc.org [19] mailto:jyoung@oclc.org [20] mailto:jyoung@oclc.org [21] http://schema.org [22] http://schema.org [23] http://schema.org [24] mailto:rxs@talis.com [25] mailto:rxs@talis.com [26] mailto:rxs@talis.com [27] http://schema.org [28] http://schema.org [29] http://schema.org/ [30] mailto:weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com [31] mailto:weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com [32] mailto:weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com [33] http://arxiv.org [34] http://arxiv.org [35] http://arxiv.org/ [36] http://arxiv.org [37] http://arxiv.org [38] http://arxiv.org/ [39] http://archive.org [40] http://archive.org [41] http://archive.org/ [42] https://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=worldcat_org_all&q=moby+dick [43] http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/62208367 [44] http://archive.org/details/mobydickorwhale02melvuoft [45] http://arxiv.org [46] http://arxiv.org [47] http://arxiv.org/ [48] mailto:weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com [49] mailto:weinheimer.jim.l@gmail.com [50] http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ [51] https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus [52] http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ [53] http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html [54] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [55] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [56] http://kcoyle.net [57] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [58] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [59] http://kcoyle.net [60] mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net [61] http://kcoyle.net [62] mailto:corey.harper@nyu.edu
Received on Friday, 5 July 2013 18:42:49 UTC