Re: journal article for next call?

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/28/13 7:39 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
>
>>
>> Perhaps CreativeWork therefore gets a "cover" property with a range of
>> ImageObject that can be repeated; the ImageObject's "name" property
>> would then enable the repeated variants to be distinguished?
>
>
>
> Note:
>
> Thing has:
> image   URL     URL of an image of the item.
>
> and
>
> CreativeWork has:
> thumbnailUrl    URL     A thumbnail image relevant to the Thing.
>
> which I'm guessing could be a non-specific property that could include cover
> art on a book or DVD, as well as a thumbnail of an art work.

Right, I saw those, but rejected them because they didn't allow for
any disambiguating properties. "thumbnailUrl" might have worked if it
wasn't tied so directly to a URL (in name as well as in range).
"image" could have its range extended to include ImageObject, I
suppose, although in that case you lose the distinction between any
other image included in a given creative work and the cover art which
holds a special place for many formats. My proposal of a "cover"
property with a range of ImageObject would allow the "name" property
to distinguish it, along with richer properties like "creator",
"description", etc.

> I note that musicRecording has not specified a property for album art, and
> the examples don't show any use of that. (Aaargh! sometimes the examples
> don't see helpful.)

MusicRecording is typically contained in http://schema.org/MusicAlbum,
which doesn't have any specific album art property either, and album
art is a key part of most music applications. So yes, I think "cover"
would apply nicely there, too, which is one of the reasons I scoped it
at the CreativeWork level.

>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>
>> Right, I'm in favour of "article" as a subproperty of "hasPart", this
>> would be consistent with having made "partOfIssuance" and
>> "partOfPeriodical" subproperties of "hasPart" as well, so I'll make
>> that change now. (Checking the Periodical proposal, I will call those
>> out as "subPropertyOf" rather than "subClassOf" to be RDFS-compliant).
>> I don't see any downside to this.
>
>
> We did discuss articles that are not parts of anything -- like the
> pre-publication articles in arxiv.org. (example in
> http://kcoyle.net/articles/)

We did! And the proposed additional properties to Article for
"partOfIssuance" / "partOfPeriodical" still have "(if any)" to support
cases like arxiv.org. One might argue about whether arxiv.org is
really a periodical; if so, we don't need to use the "partOfIssuance"
property, just the "partOfPeriodical" property; if not, we don't have
to use either "partOf" property. Either way I think the current
proposal works as it stands.

> I also found a number of items coded as
> "article" in WorldCat that are quite vague about what they may or may not be
> a part of:

I'm not convinced that that vagueness is intrinsic to the material
itself, so much as it may be a deficiency of that particular instance
in that particular discovery service.

> Nippon (Japanese) Cataloging Rules and International Cataloging Principles:
> Similarities and Differences
> Edition/Format:         Chapter Chapter : English
> Database:       Walter de Gruyter eBooks
>
>
> I think what I am seeing here are databases that offer separate chapters and
> people are beginning not to care so much about the original book. These may
> be what Shlomo was referring to. I suppose in these cases the article could
> simply be considered "part of" the database?

I would be wary about drawing broad conclusions from an example like
this. The example from WorldCat appears to be a contribution to
published conference proceedings--presented papers and country
reports--so it's not surprising to find the individual contributions
catalogued separately, but it is surprising to find it catalogued as a
book chapter without any linkage to the containing book. I think in
this particular case that the article (country report) would be
considered part of the original conference proceeding, as well as
having its own URL for electronic access.

For what it's worth, Springer also carves up their conference
proceedings into separate chapters, but does link the chapters back to
the conference proceedings in a much more rational manner (for
example, http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-36359-7_181
).

Received on Thursday, 28 November 2013 23:39:47 UTC