W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > February 2016

Re: FRBR and schema.org

From: Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:03:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPugn7WjaZNfqHW2LqsG1nQHnAo=iuD372Ww3L=d8aeBc3DLMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>
Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
Thanks Jeff

2016-02-25 18:33 GMT+01:00 Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>:

> It seems like schema:contentUrl would be the best choice to point at the
> actual URL of a media object that is being described:
> http://schema.org/contentUrl. Here’s the description:
>
>
>
> Actual bytes of the media object, for example the image file or video file.
>
>
>
> You have to stare closely at the domain and range to see the difference
> from schema:associatedMedia. They probably get mixed up in practice.
>

I intended to use contentUrl to refer to what would be the equivalent of a
FRBR Item; I was thinking of keeping a schema:MediaObject to represent the
Manifestation (linked to Expression with schema:associatedMedia as
suggested by Richard), that would use contentUrl to point to actual
physical file(s); the Manifestation is needed for various reasons :

   1. specific metadata need to be expressed on the Manifestation : the
   signed PDF has a definitive "legalValue", while other formats are only
   informative;
   2. there may be multiple physical files for a single Manifestation : a
   legislation may be splitted between a (short) body and (long) annexes (so
   there would be multiple contentUrl expressed on one Manifestation);
   3. the same Manifestation may be published at different physical
   locations : typically a Parliament website and the Official Journal
   publishers (so again multiple contentUrl, but pointing to different
   websites);

How does that sound ?

Thomas


>
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> *From:* Richard Wallis [mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 25, 2016 12:07 PM
> *To:* Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>
> *Cc:* schema.org Mailing List <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: FRBR and schema.org
>
>
>
>
>
> On 25 February 2016 at 13:32, Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> What about using schema:MediaObject+schema:associatedMedia to describe
> PDF/HTML/XML Manifestations ?
>
>
>
> I would
>
>
>
> As MediaObject is a subtype of CreativeWork you have the properties you
> need to use either associtedMedia or workExampleto relate to the
> manifestation description.
>
>
>
> ~Richard
>



-- 

*Thomas Francart* -* SPARNA*
Web de *données* | Architecture de l'*information* | Accès aux
*connaissances*
blog : blog.sparna.fr, site : sparna.fr, linkedin :
fr.linkedin.com/in/thomasfrancart
tel :  +33 (0)6.71.11.25.97, skype : francartthomas
Received on Friday, 26 February 2016 08:04:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:12:23 UTC