Re: Finalising bib.schema.org 1.0 proposal

Sure. Categorise it as a general bibliographic property if you like, but
it's worth noting somewhere that publisherImprint was primarily motivated
by Comics, and has an extremely strong use case for it.

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 08:08 Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com> wrote:

> Description of “publisherImprint” shoudn’t refer to Comics because it is a
> property on the CreativeWork and will apply to other types
>
> Owen Stephens
> Owen Stephens Consulting
> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
> Email: owen@ostephens.com
> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>
> On 22 Apr 2015, at 13:03, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:
>
>  Hi all,
>
>  I have rationalised the proposed types and properties listing on the
> wiki page <
> https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Bib.schema.org-1.0> to
> narrow down what will be in this release. As we try to get this ready for
> release at the end of this week.
>
>  Kit, Toy, PublicationSeries, BookFormatType:AudioBook,
> BookFormatType:LargePrintBook, BookFormatType:PrintBook all being deferred
> to a later release (1.1 - see wiki page <
> https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Bib.schema.org-1.1>)
>
>  Collection has been moved in with the General Types & Properties as it
> is more general than just containers.
>
>  Comics, I have added the details and links to the Wiki page.
>
>  Containers - I would still like to see this in if possible. It is
> targeted at the storage of archive material, not the organisation of
> archives themselves - see example on the container page
> <http://sdo-bib.appspot.com/Container?ext=bib> - it is a basic foundation
> that could be used elsewhere and may at a later date be ca candidate for
> promotion to there core schema.org.
>
>  As said previously, we are not precious of any of these proposals being
> in the release.  However what we have here seems to fit together well as an
> initial release of bib.schema.org.
>
>  Final comments please….
>
>
>   ~Richard
>
>
>