Re: journal article for next call?

Hi Dan,

On the collection aspect, you've definitely made me feel *really* strongly about the subclassing. That some (many) issues are collections, no doubts. But that some issues are *not* collections is enough to bar the general subclass option. And your theoretical treatment of 'atomic' issues as singleton sets, though formally elegant, is a no-go. We're here to keep things simple and intuitive, not to create solutions worth of the most complex formal ontologies.

NB: I wouldn't have objection to use Collection's 'hasPart' to indicate that an issue has several components (and so that some issues are collections indeed). But it's also possible to make 'article' a sub-property' of hasPart. This would do the trick at the formal level, while keeping a property that has much 'business sense'. But of course this pattern has the disadvantage of needing (some) people (and machines) to look at the property definition.

Cheers,

Antoine


> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/27/13 7:26 AM, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Wow, now it seems that I am the one confused ;-)
>>> I didn't mean to make any comment on periodical, just on 'issuance',
>>> which to me was the same as the much more intuitive notion of 'issue'.
>>> To me an issue is not a collection--and that's what is implied by the
>>> "Thing > CreativeWork > Collection > Issuance" from the current proposal.
>>> But maybe I've wrongly understood the proposal...
>>
>>
>> No, I think I wrongly understood your point. I thought you were saying that
>> Issuance SHOULD be sub to Collection. And I was saying that Periodical
>> SHOULD NOT be sub to collection.
>
> On the most recent call, I was convinced that Issuance should not be
> Intangible and should instead be subclassed to Collection because in
> the context of an academic journal, newspaper, news journal, popular
> magazine context it acts as a collection of articles, editorials,
> letters to the editor, pictorial spreads, etc.
>
> Many of the comics that I have in my (dated) personal collection
> include a foreword where the editor / writer / artists may have
> something to say to the readers, that is separate from the main story.
> And some (hi Groo!) also include a letters section. In a description
> of the contents of a given issue, one could very conceivably want to
> cite separate CreativeWorks within the issue (for example, Alan Moore
> as the author of a foreword to the V for Vendetta series in issue #1).
> So the subclassing of Issuance to Collection still makes sense to me.
>
> Even if a given issue collects just one CreativeWork, it doesn't
> disturb me. (The Comics proposal includes a similar statement about a
> series potentially consisting of a single one-shot issue, for what
> it's worth).
>
> However, in reviewing the comics proposal and considering these other
> kinds of CreativeWorks that might be contained in a broader sense of
> Periodical, perhaps the proposed Issuance property of "article", which
> has a range of Article and is described as "An article contained in
> this issue" is too specific? I do like the clarity of the current
> proposal for handling most magazine / journal requirements, and am
> wary of trying to satisfy too generic a need, but perhaps "article"
> goes away and we just rely on the Collection "hasPart" property to
> point at the CreativeWorks.
>
> On the flip side, I've also started wondering if "Collection"'s
> properties shouldn't simply be absorbed into CreativeWork. That would
> resolve the problem of Books that collect individual articles, TV
> episodes that contain multiple distinct stories, and probably many
> other use cases.
>
>> So we might have been saying the same
>> thing. But I agree that Issuance-sub-Collection doesn't make sense, and I'm
>> not sure that Issuance should have article page numbers, because I see that
>> as a property of the article itself. That said....
>
> I'm standing behind "pagination" as an Issuance-level property,
> because we've seen in a number of examples so far of periodicals that
> have continuing paginations (e.g. issue 1 has pages 1-150, issue 2 has
> pages 151-300, etc), and the journal issues as displayed by the
> publisher and various discovery layers feel that it is important
> enough to include the pagination in the current displays. We need
> "pagination" rather than Book's "numberOfPages" because there is no
> way of knowing if the pagination is continuing or not with a plain
> Integer value.
>
> I agree that Articles can and should still have their own pagination
> property. We could make it more complex than the current Text range
> (something like http://schema.org/OpeningHoursSpecification?) but I'm
> not sure if we really want to go there :)
>
>> Here's what the comics proposal lists [1]:
>>
>>
>>       Periodical Series - a sequential grouping of periodical issues - The
>> New Yorker, Redbook, The Lancet, Amazing Spider-Man
>>      Periodical Issues - individual instances of periodicals - The New Yorker
>> Vol. 1, Issue 4
>>      Individual comic issues - short-form, saddle-stitched, serially
>> published comics (the pamphlet-sized comics seen in comic book stores and
>> hobby shops) - Amazing Spider-Man# 600
>>
>> Their series includes the volume (even tho' the definition does not), so it
>> looks like our issuance crosses their 'series' and 'issues'.
>
> Yes, I've been puzzling over that for a while, and wondering if their
> use case for "grouping of periodical issues" was perhaps focused on
> story arcs, or runs with the same writer (back when Alan Moore took
> over Swamp Thing, for example) or artist, rather than strictly on
> volume. It's an interesting one!
>
>> Their "Individual comic issue" seems to be an anthology of previously published
>> items, most likely within a series, that might get a series statement in
>> library cataloging.[2] It could be thought of as a collection, but I doubt
>> if anyone will be listing the individual parts.
>
> My interpretation was that Comic Issue was meant to simply model a
> single issue of a 32-page (or whatever) comic book that you would pick
> up at a comic store.
>
>> They also have "Graphic
>> novel" which is a monograph that extends book, but that isn't a re-print of
>> things that were once part of a comic series.
>
> Well... they have the "collectedIssues" property which explicitly says
> that it is "a list of all issues collected in the graphic novel (for
> collections of reprinted works)" to support both use cases, I believe.
>
>> I think at this point we need a comparative table. I will try to do that.
>> What I think this means, though, is that there will be different views so
>> that periodicity may be used in a variety of ways at different bibliographic
>> "levels." Which would mean that we need to impose little pre-conceived
>> structure on properties like "issue" "volume" etc. so that people can use
>> them as they exist within their own context.
>>
>> I don't know how we engage the comics folks on this, but it could be an
>> interesting conversation.
>
> I've CCed Peter Olson and Henry Andrews, who were part of the
> discussion on public-vocabs back in February 2012. Hopefully they are
> still interested!
>
>>
>> kc
>>
>> p.s. I KNEW that serials would be a headache!
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/PeriodicalsComics
>> [2] I tried to find some examples, but libraries don't carry the flimsy
>> comics, usually, and some seem to be doing funky cataloging of the ones they
>> do buy, expecting that they won't last long. In any case, how libraries
>> catalog comics shouldn't drive too much of our view, IMO.
>
> There are examples like
> http://marvel.com/comics/issue/43271/wolverine_the_x-men_2011_33 -
> which make me think that a property for cover art & variant cover art
> would be a good addition to the comics proposal.
>

Received on Thursday, 28 November 2013 07:02:28 UTC