Re: [schemaorg] Vocabulary for comics (#378)

Yes.

http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Contribute

We aren't as shackled as we think we are.



On Mar 12, 2015, at 11:11 PM, Jeff Mixter <jeffmixter@gmail.com<mailto:jeffmixter@gmail.com>> wrote:

Sean,

Great work. I scanned through the ontology that you have created and it is very interesting.

I would also argue that the LC relator illustrator [ill] could be used in place of inker, letterist, and penciller, which would then give content authors the option to clarify that role with schema:roleName using the patterns identified further along in this thread. I'm guessing it would look something like this (building on Dan's example from the message that follows this one):

I would suggest that the roleName use a URI whenever possible such as a LC relator URI or WikiData URI (as Jeff did in his example). I worry about query if you rely on a string label for the roleName (for example 'penciler' vs. 'Penciler' vs. 'pencil'). Obviously you could conduct a simple query to get all of the roleNames first and then use them for further query but that could get pretty long if you image 2 or 3 variations on each possible roleName (excluding spelling mistakes). If you can not find an appropriate URI for example there is no 'penciler' property, that is where you can start to ask questions about creating a new property (say in your ontology). This way it would act more like an extension vocabulary that could fit within the framework of Schema.org<http://Schema.org>. If you want to add more detail you could always add a plain old schema:name property to the Role. This could be used for localized use by domain experts who want to specifically refine the Role.

Jeff M

On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Sean Petiya <spetiya1@kent.edu<mailto:spetiya1@kent.edu>> wrote:
Hi Richard and all,


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.

In reference to comics, I think these major roles can best be identified by the various stages in which a comic work is produced: the script, pencils, inks, letters, and colors, up to the finished, published work. In addition to editorial credits---and perhaps more comics specific roles like "plotter"---I believe whats listed in the existing proposal represents the core set of creative contributions, especially as they relate to stages in the production process that can then be linked to examples of original comics artwork. Also I believe they are roles most readily identifiable with comics, which is why you'll find these credits highlighted specifically in the majority of comics data on the Web.

All that being said, none of these roles are necessarily comic book specific, and define contributions to the production of any graphic work (of note: animated cartoons, comic strips, manga, etc.). I would also argue that the LC relator illustrator [ill] could be used in place of inker, letterist, and penciller, which would then give content authors the option to clarify that role with schema:roleName using the patterns identified further along in this thread. I'm guessing it would look something like this (building on Dan's example from the message that follows this one):

  <span property="contributor" typeof="Role">
    <dt><span property="roleName">Pencils</span>:</dt>
    <dd><span property="contributor lcrel:illustrator">Ron Lim</span></dd>
  </span>
  <span property="contributor" typeof="Role">
    <dt><span property="roleName">Inks</span>:</dt>
    <dd><span property="contributor lcrel:illustrator">Ron Lim</span></dd>
  </span>
  <span property="contributor" typeof="Role">
    <dt><span property="roleName">Letters</span>:</dt>
    <dd><span property="contributor lcrel:illustrator">Dave Sharpe</span></dd>
  </span>

I think most (all?) inkers would argue that they do more than trace the pencils [1] (see the NSFW clip from Chasing Amy -- "You're a Tracer"), and play an active creative role in the illustration.

This same pattern could also be used with the LC relator artist [art] for other types of "minor", or less common credits, such as designer, painter, etc. For example: http://www.comics.org/issue/250970/ where both the cover and interior artwork are painted.

So that would leave coverArtist from Jeff's list (a property which is also relevant for other types of CreativeWork: album covers, book covers, etc.). Perhaps the following would work (using the example above), or even LC cover designer [cv]?:

  <span property="contributor" typeof="Role">
    <dt><span property="roleName">Cover Art</span>:</dt>
    <dd><span property="contributor lcrel:artist">Bill Sienkiewicz</span></dd>
  </span>


So, if the goal in schema.org<http://schema.org> proper is to not overlap or add exhaustive roles, the suggestions in this thread would certainly work for comics! But they would hopefully be called out in the accompanying documentation examples, as webmasters will certainly be looking for them. And if there were to be a bib.schema.org<http://bib.schema.org> extension for comics, maybe they could live there. Some of the granularity and minutiae, and I'm a big fan of comic book minutiae---can be fulfilled through a domain vocabulary.


Your use of the term name ‘role’ conflicts with the Role<http://schema.org/Role> type in Schma.org<http://Schma.org>, which in itself is not a problem (you could use creativeRole for example).

Actually intended this property to function similar to schema:roleName, so I will investigate, thank you for bringing it to my attention.

Finally, I'm in agreement with the original GitHub poster, Davide. One of the most immediately useful features of the comics proposal is the addition of the comics-specific classes (this proposal covers Manga too, right? via format?). It would also be nice if it addressed how some of the bibliographic relationships, like "reprints" or "collects", were able to be expressed (workExample/exampleOfWork, right?).

Something I would like to see is collected editions like (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/714725942) connected to representations of the individual issues they collect in resources like the Grand Comics Database****, with other providers filling in the minutiae (characters, stories, historical notes, etc.) downstream. See this example, for what I think that might look like, and maybe a peek at some other comic book properties like certification, grades, bindings, etc.

[1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/seanpetiya/thesis/master/examples/main/fig45-linked-data-main-ex.html

*** I do not represent the Grand Comics Database in any official capacity, except for the fact that I do contribute to and make use of the organization's data.

Sean




--
Jeff Mixter
jeffmixter@gmail.com<mailto:jeffmixter@gmail.com>
440-773-9079