- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 21:17:52 +0000
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Antoine, As I understand it, this should be understood as "A4 is a member of A1.... and oh, by the way, I snuck in this Role node so I can say something more about the 'member' relationship ". Here's the description of schema:Role: "Represents additional information about a relationship or property. For example a Role can be used to say that a 'member' role linking some SportsTeam to a player occurred during a particular time period. Or that a Person's 'actor' role in a Movie was for some particular characterName. Such properties can be attached to a Role entity, which is then associated with the main entities using ordinary properties like 'member' or 'actor'." It's like a get-out-of-triple-jail-free card without having to jail break RDF parsers. Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: Antoine Isaac [mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl] > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 5:09 PM > To: public-schemabibex@w3.org > Subject: Re: [schemaorg] Vocabulary for comics (#378) > > Hi Dan, everyone, > > I wonder how the comics ontology relates to some work on manga seem in > the past > http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2467696.2467731 > http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/pubs/article/download/979/952 > > About role, I have a perhaps stupid question: does anyone remembers why > schema.org has a "double use" of the property that relates the role to the > two resources it relates? > > Reading Jeff's example: > > _:A1 schema:member [ > a schema:Role; > schema:roleName entity:Q5371902; # harpsichordist > schema:member _:A4; > ]; > > This could be understood as "the agent A4 is a member of a role that is a > member of a group." > > If the group had had a "guest" harpsichordist for one concert, then we would > have > > _:A1 schema:member [ > a schema:Role; > schema:roleName entity:Q5371902; # harpsichordist > schema:member _:A4; > ]; > _:A1 schema:guest [ > a schema:Role; > schema:roleName entity:Q5371902; # harpsichordist > schema:guest _:A5; > ]; > > Is there interest in having to adapt the pattern in two places, as opposed to > have a same property (say, "rolePlayer") for every link between a role to the > entity that plays it? > > Thanks, > > Antoine > > On 3/12/15 8:51 PM, Wallis,Richard wrote: > > Yes Dan, I agree - I was over complicating things by inventing the need for a > Role subType she Role on its own would be sufficient. > > > > Good example Jeff. > > > > ~Richard > > > > On 12 Mar 2015, at 17:39, Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org > <mailto:jyoung@oclc.org>> wrote: > > > >> I agree that coordination on roleNames (especially using URIs) would be a > great. > >> Here's a mockup I did recently to account for the instruments that > individual musicians played on a music album. It was while I was mocking this > up that I realized how many were covered by WikiData: > >> > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/68401641/Devon/TextExtraction.ttl > >> Jeff > >> *From:*Dan Scott [mailto:denials@gmail.com] *Sent:*Thursday, March > >> 12, 2015 1:33 PM *To:*Wallis,Richard; Sean Petiya *Cc:*Young,Jeff > >> (OR); public-schemabibex@w3.org <mailto:public-schemabibex@w3.org> > >> *Subject:*Re: [schemaorg] Vocabulary for comics (#378) On Thu, 12 Mar > >> 2015 at 12:42 Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org > <mailto:Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Sean, > >> My personal opinion is that the work you and the previously referenced > draft on the Wiki > <http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Periodicals_and_Comic > s_synthesis> are within the scope of this group to discuss. > >> As Jeff indicated, there is some overlap and/or mismatch between your > discussions of Role and similar concepts from the Library of Congress Relator > Codes and WikiData. How these terms are defined/referenced in the > vocabulary is then a question. I am always sceptical of statements such as > "set that covers the major...", because it is very difficult to a)get agreement > on what is major and b) what do you do about defying the minor ones. > >> Your use of the term name 'role' conflicts with the Role > <http://schema.org/Role> type inSchma.org <http://schma.org/>, which in > itself is not a problem (you could use creativeRole for example). However in > covering off this need, I think it would be worth considering the creation of a > ContributionRole subtype of Role which would allow the qualification of the > contributor relationship between CreativeWork and Person or Organization. > Then using the roleName attribute the type of contribution could be > qualified either by a URL to the Library of Congress Relators, or WikiData, etc. > definitions, or, if not available, in plain text. > >> > >> Erm. I thought the agreed-upon pattern for using Role (first proposed by > danbri athttp://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public- > vocabs/2014Sep/0009.html) would be to apply the external vocabulary > property in combination with schema:contributor (e.g. lcrel:clr) and apply > schema:roleName for those consumers that might, for whatever reason, > want to limit themselves to justschema.org <http://schema.org/>. E.g.: > >> <dl vocab="http://schema.org/" > prefix="lcrel:http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/"> > >> <span property="contributor" typeof="Role"> > >> <dt><span property="roleName">Pencils</span>:</dt> > >> <dd><span property="contributor">Ron Lim</span></dd> > >> </span> > >> <span property="contributor" typeof="Role"> > >> <dt><meta property="roleName" content="colorist">Colors:</dt> > >> <dd><span property="contributor lcrel:clr">Chris > Sotomayor</span></dd> > >> </span> > >> </dl> > >> ... which generates something like: > >> ns1:contributor [ a ns1:Role ; > >> ns1:contributor "Ron Lim" ; > >> ns1:roleName "Pencils" ], > >> [ a ns1:Role ; > >> lcrel:clr "Chris Sotomayor" ; > >> ns1:contributor "Chris Sotomayor" ; > >> ns1:roleName "colorist" ]; This was the direction I was > >> taking things with my preconference at SWIB, which even includes a > >> Comic example: > >> > https://coffeecode.net/swib14/preconference/rdfa_exercises/6_comic_bo > >> ok/ We could certainly update guidance and examples to use > >> contributor types from wikidata and other vocabularies, but I would > >> like to ensure we're starting from a common understanding. And having > >> put a fair amount of effort into the last iteration of Periodicals & > >> Comics, I have some interest in Comics going forward :) > >
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2015 21:18:27 UTC