- From: Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:18:04 +0100
- To: Dan Scott <denials@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <8C595102-2630-445B-B924-AA23241C466C@ostephens.com>
Not really got my head around the schema.org actions yet, and this is different thing than simply expressing 'holdings', but it seems to me that viewing/reading an electronic resource falls into the potential action in the http://schema.org/ConsumeAction hierarchy? Do we need 'holdings' or should we be thinking about offering actions on the item? Owen Owen Stephens Owen Stephens Consulting Web: http://www.ostephens.com Email: owen@ostephens.com Telephone: 0121 288 6936 On 29 Apr 2014, at 17:58, Dan Scott <denials@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello: > > Sparked by a question from Ed Summers in IRC, I thought this would be > worth running past the group. > > When we initially talked about expressing holdings, we took the > (reasonable) shortcut of just using the "url" property for the > Book/MusicAlbum/descendant-of-Thing to point at the available > electronic resource, and tackled the holdings-as-Offers route for the > more physical resources. > > However, Ed is generating a JSON-LD list of holdings for a set of > institutions, and it seems clear in that use case that it would be > useful for clients to be able to parse the list of electronic and > physical holdings in the same way. > > So, I'm thinking of adding a bit of description and an example to > https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Holdings_via_Offer - > something like: > > """ > **Electronic resources** > > You can use the 'url' property of the CreativeWork to link directly to > the available representation of the work. > > However, if you need to represent the physical and electronic holdings > in a consistent fashion, you can also list the electronic resources as > part of the holdings-as-Offer pattern. Specify "availability" as > http://schema.org/OnlineOnly and "url" as the URL for the work, as in > the following example: > > <table vocab="http://schema.org/"> > > <!-- Example of an electronically available copy --> > <tr property="offers" typeof="http://schema.org/Offer"> > <td><a property="url" > href="http://example.com/online/resource">Available online</a> > <link property="availability" href="http://schema.org/OnlineOnly"> > <div>Library: <span property="seller">Main branch</span></div> > <link property="businessFunction" > href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#LeaseOut"> > </td> > </tr> > > <!-- Example of a physical copy available for loan --> > <tr property="offers" typeof="Offer"> > <th>Copy </th> > <td>Available > <link property="availability" href="http://schema.org/InStock"> > <div>Library: <span property="seller">Example Bookmobile 1</span></div> > <div>Barcode: <span property="serialNumber">CONC91000937</span></div> > <div>Call number: <span property="sku">780 R2</span></div> > <link property="businessFunction" > href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#LeaseOut"> > </td> > </tr> > <table> > """ > > Here's the one wrinkle: taking this approach, the "url" in this markup > is technically (I believe) the URL of the Offer itself, not of the > item being offered. However, it seems like the most straighforward > approach that enables one to present the structured data in a > consistently consumable fashion, so I'm very tempted to recommend > this. > > Does anyone have strong objections and a better approach to recommend? > > Dan >
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 13:18:35 UTC