- From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:54:15 -0500
- To: Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com>
- Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>, "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAChbWaPv72Azx+YkPK7Ktb2btEmAJtyOB9UkZ+pkWU5EFvx-CQ@mail.gmail.com>
Now, let's get back to the Toy EXTENSION (not Proposal) needs. What properties do you feel are necessary for that Domain and folks that touch that Domain (including libraries) ? Thad +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote: > Owen, > > Extensions ARE NOT proposals for Schema.org ..... that happens LATER. > > Think of extensions as "I have a need to extend Schema.org to describe my > Domain better and collaborate with my peers and partners". > > Whether an extension gets fully merged and absorbed or partially absorbed > into Schema.org ... happens later and is not guaranteed....what is > guaranteed and promised is sage guidance and collaboration and hosting of > the extension via the Schema.org partners. > > Thad > +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com> wrote: > >> But surely the point isn’t to do things that can be done adequately with >> existing Schema.org types & properties, or to do something that is >> already done via other extensions in a way which is adequate to your needs? >> >> I think it is fair for me to ask: >> >> a) What do we want to say about Toys that can’t already be said >> adequately with non-extended schema.org >> b) Whether proposed extensions in this group are ‘in scope’ for this >> group which is to "discuss and prepare proposal(s) for extending >> Schema.org schemas for the improved representation of bibliographic >> information” >> >> If we were discussing an extension for representing MARC records in >> schema.org I’d have no objection to Toy and Kit - they would be 100% >> necessary. >> >> I don’t feel like I’m asking unreasonable questions here, but I seem to >> be a lone voice. If no-one else thinks these are concerns then I’ll let >> them drop just noting that I’m yet to be convinced that these particular >> proposals (Toy and Kit) are ones that are required in a ‘bibliographic’ >> extension to schema.org >> >> Owen >> >> Owen Stephens >> Owen Stephens Consulting >> Web: http://www.ostephens.com >> Email: owen@ostephens.com >> Telephone: 0121 288 6936 >> >> On 16 Apr 2015, at 15:33, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> This group can.... do whatever they want...and own an extension for >> whatever purpose they choose, Owen. >> >> I think you might have misunderstood what the Schema extension mechanism >> is for...it is for Domains. >> >> If BIB extension overlaps with MATTEL extension, then that is fine. And >> if neither of them ever gets merged into Schema.org, then that is also >> going to be just fine. Extensions can work independently if they want or >> if their Domain needs demand an independent schema model. >> >> Extending off of Schema.org is where the importance lies for everyone >> involved...where there is some alignment to Schema.org's major Type >> hierarchy. Many extensions can be aligned, and furthermore, they might be >> aligned in different ways, and that is just fine and expected. >> >> >> Thad >> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry> >> >> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Sure - I wasn’t really debating that as such. So: >>> >>> Why do Toys get some special treatment over all other types of things >>> that also have their specialist properties? I’d like to see some >>> justification beyond “some libraries have toys in their collection” >>> Are we proposing anything in terms of special properties for Toys that >>> mean we need a new type? (I can’t see anything proposed) >>> Does this group include the appropriate domain expertise to discuss the >>> special properties of Toys? If not, shouldn’t we find a way of getting this >>> input? >>> >>> Owen >>> >>> >>> Owen Stephens >>> Owen Stephens Consulting >>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com >>> Email: owen@ostephens.com >>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936 >>> >>> On 16 Apr 2015, at 15:15, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> There are many special properties about toys. >>> >>> The National Institute for Play has some as well as the Consumer Product >>> Safety Commission. >>> >>> If your not a Domain expert then you may often think... no big deal. :) >>> On Apr 16, 2015 4:43 AM, "Owen Stephens" <owen@ostephens.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Ok - but there has been extensive discussion about having lots of >>>> ‘types’ of product and I understood the general advice was to use wikidata >>>> to enumerate product types. What is so special about Toys that they deserve >>>> a type? >>>> >>>> If libraries start marking up as Toy types, how will that compare to >>>> what the commercial sector does when describing Toys? What difference will >>>> this make. >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>> Owen Stephens >>>> Owen Stephens Consulting >>>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com >>>> Email: owen@ostephens.com >>>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936 >>>> >>>> On 16 Apr 2015, at 10:27, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> In the spirit of the question, a simple answer is that they are - the >>>> proposed Toy type being a subtype of Product. >>>> >>>> ~Richard >>>> >>>> On 16 Apr 2015, at 11:16, Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I’m going start with a simple question about Toy... >>>> >>>> Why aren’t Toys just handled as a schema.org Product? >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>> Owen Stephens >>>> Owen Stephens Consulting >>>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com >>>> Email: owen@ostephens.com >>>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936 >>>> >>>> On 14 Apr 2015, at 22:26, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> A few weeks back we discussed how this group or some of its members >>>> could participate as a bibliographic domain group to propose and review a >>>> bibliographic extension to schema.org with the current working name of >>>> bib.schema.org. >>>> >>>> Since then I have been liaising with Dan Brickley and others in the >>>> main Schema.org <http://schema.org/> group who have been working to >>>> establish the hosting software that enables the extension capability. This >>>> work is now close to being ready for release. Dan has indicated that this >>>> provides an excellent opportunity for a bibliographic extension to be one >>>> of, if not the first, enabled and released in this way. In preparation for >>>> this, Dan Scott and I have put together a candidate set of types and >>>> properties that could constitute an initial bib extension release, which >>>> this email introduces. >>>> >>>> There are many potential candidates for new/enhanced types and >>>> properties which the finessing and accepting of which would need to be the >>>> subject of some in depth discussion within this group. To take advantage >>>> of the opportunity to release along with the capability release, however, >>>> we need to agree a starting subset fairly quickly. To that end Dan and I >>>> have drawn up this initial (1.0) proposal consisting of what we believe to >>>> be things that are fairly noncontroversial. >>>> >>>> I list the proposed types and properties below with links to their >>>> representation in a development version of the Schema.org >>>> <http://schema.org/> site. They are in three independent groups of >>>> proposals, for general bibliographic markup; some helpful things for the >>>> physical structure of archives & basic collections; and for comics. >>>> >>>> We can accept/reject either individual types and properties, or a >>>> whole group, because we need to explore things in more depth and defer >>>> things to a later release. I would hope though that fairly quickly we >>>> could come to at least a subset of these as an initial release. >>>> >>>> A reminder that Dan Brickley is still working on the software capable >>>> of handling extensions so please view the content more than how it >>>> currently displays. >>>> >>>> General Bibliographic Types & Properties >>>> >>>> - Agent <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Agent> >>>> - Atlas <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Atlas> >>>> - Chapter <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Chapter> >>>> - Globe <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Globe> >>>> - Kit <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Kit> >>>> - Meeting <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Meeting> >>>> - Newspaper <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Newspaper> >>>> - MusicScore <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/MusicScore> >>>> - PublicationSeries <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/PublicationSeries> >>>> - Thesis <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Thesis> >>>> - Toy <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Toy> >>>> - BookFormatType:AudioBook <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/AudioBook> >>>> - BookFormatType:LargePrintBook >>>> <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/LargePrintBook> >>>> - BookFormatType:PrintBook <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/PrintBook> >>>> - MapCategoryType:CartographicMap >>>> <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/CartographicMap> >>>> - inSupportOf <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/inSupportOf> >>>> - translationOfWork <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/translationOfWork> >>>> - translator <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/translator> >>>> - workTranslation <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/workTranslation> >>>> >>>> >>>> Archive Containers/Collection >>>> >>>> - BoxContainer <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/BoxContainer> >>>> - Collection <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Collection> >>>> - Container <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Container> >>>> - FolderContainer <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/FolderContainer> >>>> - Shelf <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Shelf> >>>> - contains <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/contains> >>>> - containedIn <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/containedIn> >>>> >>>> >>>> Comics >>>> >>>> - ComicIssue <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/ComicIssue> >>>> - ComicSeries <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/ComicSeries> >>>> - ComicStory <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/ComicStory> >>>> - CoverArt <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/CoverArt> >>>> - ComicCoverArt <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/ComicCoverArt> >>>> - BookFormatType:GraphicNovel >>>> <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/GraphicNovel> >>>> - artist <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/artist> >>>> - colorist <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/colorist> >>>> - inker <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/inker> >>>> - letterer <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/letterer> >>>> - penciler <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/penciler> >>>> - publisherImprint <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/publisherImprint> >>>> - variantCover <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/variantCover> >>>> >>>> >>>> I look forward to comments. >>>> >>>> ~Richard. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 16 April 2015 14:54:45 UTC