RE: Schema.org and "Holdings"

It looks like that URI is stateful, so it's probably not the best choice. The next best choice might be to rationalize the #loginLinkComponent anchor on the detail page next to the "Hold this item for me":

http://encore.berkeley-public.org/iii/encore/record/C__Rb1644069__Srobert%20pirsig__Orightresult__X4#loginLinkComponent

These URIs might be stable for awhile, but even they look fragile.

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karen Coyle [mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net]
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 10:08 AM
> To: Young,Jeff (OR)
> Cc: public-schemabibex@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Schema.org and "Holdings"
> 
> Jeff, there is a (very complex) URI for that particular hold, which
> will be in the html. In my local library's pages I don't see anything
> that would indicate a place hold service.
> 
> http://encore.berkeley-
> public.org/iii/encore/SearchResultsPage,searchResultsComponent.resultCo
> mponent.searchBrowseResultBibComponent.requestLinkComponent.requestDial
> ogLinkComponent.sdirect?lang=eng&sp=Sb1578523&sp=ZH4sIAAAAAAAAAFvzloG1r
> ojBODk%2FVy8zM1MvIz8npSi1sDS1uETPMam4pCgxucQDKBYEEVOB0iGVBakMUCDEwFBRxM
> CXlViWqJeTmJeu55pXmossWVDCwB7k6h7q4xgEAImPhxFvAAAA&suite=pearl
> 
> I also wonder whether we should include something for "due date" or if
> this becomes the content of the availability property. I think it is
> the latter, so it would be:
> 
> 
> Central Library Mystery Hillerman, T   DUE 07-26-13
> 
> availableAtorFrom: Central Library Mystery
> sku: Hillerman, T
> outOfStock: DUE 07-26-13
> 
> kc
> 
> On 7/11/13 5:46 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
> > Also, it occurs to me that the http URI of the library's "place hold"
> > service for a manifestation could be used as the URI of the
> > schema:Offer in the markup. In Dan's mockup these are blank nodes
> > anyway, so this would kill two birds with one stone.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > Sent via a cracked screen :-(
> >
> > On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:25 PM, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org
> > <mailto:jyoung@oclc.org>> wrote:
> >
> >> Good Relations has a http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#LeaseOut term
> >> that can be used in combination with the schema:businessFunction
> >> property on schema:Offer. Our case is kind of like that. Perhaps we
> >> could get Martin Hepp to add "#LibraryLoan to his GoodRelations
> >> vocabulary and tackle it from that direction.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> Sent via a cracked screen :-(
> >>
> >> On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:11 PM, "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net
> >> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dan, thanks so much for this. I think we need to extend your
> >>> experiment to some other holdings displays (ebook, periodical). I'm
> >>> especially curious to see how to handle something like a book that
> >>> is checked out (OutOfStock) but where the library offers an online
> >>> 'place hold' service. How can we highlight those services?
> >>>
> >>> I'm a bit nervous about linking the ISBN to the item -- the ISBN
> >>> will be recorded in the schema/Book description, but, as we've
> >>> argued at length on the BIBFRAME list, library data often has
> >>> multiple ISBNs but these are not associated with individual copies.
> >>> In fact, the library may not even have a copy for each ISBN in its
> >>> bibliographic record.
> >>>
> >>> Jeff suggested a while back something about listing the price as
> $0.
> >>> I don't think that conveys the concept of lending, even though the
> >>> price is right. It feels to me that we need something that means
> >>> "lending" as well as the ability to give the loan period. I don't
> >>> see anything similar to this in schema.org <http://schema.org> --
> >>> maybe I'm missing it?
> >>>
> >>> If I get a chance (not until next week, at least) I'll see if I
> >>> can't mock up some other examples, but of course if anyone else has
> >>> some time...
> >>>
> >>> kc
> >>>
> >>> On 7/9/13 11:38 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
> >>>> Hi Jeff et al:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org
> >>>> <mailto:jyoung@oclc.org>> wrote:
> >>>>> Dan,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for volunteering to experiment with schema:Product/Offer
> >>>>> for holdings in your system. The attached UML might help
> >>>>> illustrate how some of the Schema.org <http://Schema.org> terms
> fit together.
> >>>>> There are at least a couple ways to traverse their model to
> >>>>> accomplish it, depending on how expressive you want to be. I look
> >>>>> forward to comparing notes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for the UML model. I opted to start with schema.org/Offer
> >>>> <http://schema.org/Offer> and map the Evergreen library system's
> >>>> public holdings display (physical and electronic) using only
> >>>> existing schema.org <http://schema.org> properties. As it turns
> >>>> out, ProductModel / IndividualProduct / SomeProducts /
> >>>> QuantitativeValue don't seem to be necessary if you're simply
> >>>> modelling holdings as they surface in many library systems today.
> >>>>
> >>>> Some of the real-world characteristics that came into play with
> >>>> Evergreen's sample data (reinforcing many of the examples that
> >>>> Karen provided at http://kcoyle.net/holdings.html) are:
> >>>>
> >>>> * Multiple copies may be displayed for any given record. I mapped
> >>>> each copy to a separate http://schema.org/Offer object. Also, I
> >>>> opted to use the additionalType of "Product" instead of
> >>>> "IndividualProduct", as IndividualProduct is defined as "A single,
> >>>> identifiable product instance (e.g. a laptop with a particular
> serial number)."
> >>>> * Each copy has a library at which it is currently circulating. I
> >>>> mapped this to the http://schema.org/Offer "seller" property (just
> >>>> using the raw text of the library name as a reasonable starting
> >>>> point; a future development could be for Evergreen to expose one
> >>>> URI per library, from which the library coordinates, opening
> hours,
> >>>> contact information, branch hierarchy, etc could be derived -- as
> >>>> Evergreen already knows most of that information).
> >>>> * Each copy has a call number. I mapped this to the
> >>>> http://schema.org/Offer "sku" (stock keeping unit) property, as "a
> >>>> merchant-specific identifier for a product or service" seems like
> a
> >>>> good enough match.
> >>>> * Each copy has a barcode. I mapped this to the
> >>>> http://schema.org/Offer "serialNumber" property.
> >>>> * Each copy has a shelving location. I mapped this to the
> >>>> http://schema.org/Offer "availableAtOrFrom" property (just using
> >>>> the raw text of the location as a http://schema.org/Place as a
> >>>> reasonable starting point).
> >>>> * Each copy has an availability status, which I was able to map to
> >>>> the http://schema.org/Offer "availability" property. In turn, I
> was
> >>>> able to use the stock http://schema.org/ItemAvailability
> >>>> enumeration without torturing definitions much. For example,
> >>>> "Available" = http://schema.org/InStock, "Checked Out" =
> >>>> http://schema.org/OutOfStock, "On Order" =
> >>>> http://schema.org/PreOrder, "On Reserve" =
> http://schema.org/InStoreOnly.
> >>>> * Records _might_ have an ISBN13; if they do, then I map those to
> >>>> the http://schema.org/Offer "gtin13" property for each copy. In
> >>>> retrospect, given that we have the addtionalType of
> >>>> http://schema.org/Product, I could just define that at the Product
> >>>> level... an optimization for next time! I could also get fancier
> >>>> and convert ISBN10 identifiers to gtin13 if we don't have an
> ISBN13.
> >>>>
> >>>> * Holdings often list electronic resources, as well. If so, I map
> >>>> them to a http://schema.org/Offer and make the
> >>>> http://schema.org/ItemAvailability enumeration using
> >>>> http://schema.org/OnlineOnly. There is some potential for using
> the
> >>>> http://schema.org/Offer eligibleCustomerType property to identify
> >>>> whether a given electronic resource is publicly available, or
> >>>> restricted to library patrons (or a particular subset of library
> >>>> patrons) via proxy access or the like.
> >>>>
> >>>> * The Evergreen record display also includes one or more summary
> >>>> statements about copy availability, reflecting each level of a
> >>>> consortium / system / branch hierarchy. For example, if you're
> >>>> searching at Branch 1, the display might say "36 copies available
> >>>> at Consortium; 15 copies available at Branch 1". I mapped these
> >>>> statements to simple http://schema.org/AggregateOffer objects
> using
> >>>> just the "seller" and "offerCount" properties.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thus far, I'm pretty happy with the results. You can see an
> example
> >>>> at http://stuff.coffeecode.net/schema.org/holdings_ex1.html and
> >>>> Google's Rich Snippets Tool appears to be happy with it (at
> >>>>
> http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?q=stuff.coffeecode.
> net%2Fschema.org%2Fholdings_ex1.html).
> >>>> I did strip out much of the unnecessary fluff from the example,
> but
> >>>> it originates from an Evergreen working branch at
> >>>> http://git.evergreen-
> ils.org/?p=working/Evergreen.git;a=shortlog;h=
> >>>> refs/heads/user/dbs/schema_holdings
> >>>> so all of this would work in the wild today for Evergreen
> libraries
> >>>> eager to expose their holdings via schema.org <http://schema.org>
> >>>> microdata. Also, I can easily grab other samples from my local dev
> >>>> instance of Evergreen if people are interested, and I can import
> >>>> new records / create new combinations of holdings, etc, on demand.
> >>>> (This record came from
> >>>> http://laurentian.concat.ca/eg/opac/record/341237 which only has a
> >>>> minimal level of schema.org <http://schema.org> microdata).
> >>>>
> >>>> I didn't want to muddy the waters in the W3 wiki just yet, given
> >>>> that we already have a few different pages where holdings are
> being
> >>>> explored. Perhaps if this direction seems of interest to the
> group,
> >>>> we could work towards formalizing the suggestions for
> implementers.
> >>>>
> >>>> Dan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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 Friday, 12 July 2013 15:03:02 UTC