RE: Suggestion for new category

How do we represent that a play has characters e.g. Romeo, and that in a production/performance a specific person plays that character?
I see in that:

a)      Person can be used for a fictional character as well as a real person. So Romeo can be modeled as a Person linked using the character property from CreativeWork.

b)      We can use PerformanceRole between Play and Person to represent the character that person plays (in the same way you use Carpenter in your example)
However PerformanceRole has characterName as only a Text property: there seems no way of identifying/linking to the fictional Person representing the character Romeo in the play Romeo and Juliet. It seems there should be a property characterPlayed of type Person (or add Person as an additional type on characterName).


From: Richard Wallis []
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 1:44 PM
To: Jacob Jett <>
Cc:; Han, Myung-Ja <>; Sarol, Maria Janina <>; Kinnaman, Alex Olivia <>; Cole, Timothy W <>
Subject: Re: Suggestion for new category

I think we are conflating 3 separate aspects here.

Firstly the relationship between a play, a production(s) of that play, and individual performance(s) of a production.  I think the suggestion of using CreativeWorkSeries “a group of related items, typically but not necessarily of the same kind” is maybe leading us off at a tangent.  The series approach is often used for things like The Harry Potter series of movies, or the For Dummies Book series.   The production(s) of a play are not normally a series they are different creative interpretations of the play.   To that end I see a production as its own CreativeWork(play subtype) that is an example of the original creative work (Play subtype).

A production is performed one or more times at individual performance ‘events’ these could possibly collected together into a season/run/festival - an event with individual subEvents

Next we have the relationship between the Play/CreativeWork and other creative works that contribute to, or are associated with, but not part of the work - as per the example of stage notes.  Eric’s suggestion of using ‘mention’ or ‘about’ is a step in the right direction but I agree it does not quite capture what is needed.  What if there was a ‘relatedWork’ or ‘associatedWork’ property available on CreativeWork?

Then there is the issue of how to describe the different types of contributors/performers associated with a CreativeWork beyond the common ones that already are defined, such as actor, author, director, composer, etc.   In proposing a Play type there is the option to propose some play relevant properties.  Director, choreographer, conductor, are potential candidates but, in a generic vocabulary such as, how far down the production team list is it practical to go?  What about carpenter, wigs mistress, chief electrician, etc.?

When you move beyond a few common jobs that might make sense to add to Play, we need to look at using the Role<> construct:

   > name: “The Tempest”
   > contributor: > Role:
                        > roleName: “Carpenter”
                        > contributor >  Person:
                                            > name: “Joe Soap”

For more on Role see The role of Role in<>.

So as to a proposal for Play oriented properties, we should constrain ourselves to a few obvious ones, defaulting to using Role as we get further down the credit list - as the Movie folks do.

Finally a question as to the narrowness of what is being discussed/proposed.   Are we (or could we) covering other live show possibilities?  Musical, Concert, Variety Show, Comedy Club Night, Cabaret, Opera,  are all possibilities that come to mind.


Richard Wallis
Founder, Data Liberate


Twitter: @rjw

On 3 March 2016 at 18:50, Jacob Jett <<>> wrote:
Still missing the concern. The example is more like this:

  *   Amelia: Mourning is a VisualArtwork A1

     *   A1 has a genre of costume design drawings

  *   Vanity Fair is a Play (which would presumably be a subtype of Creative Work but which does not yet exist in the schema vocab.) P1 (from here we could proceed as Richard has in his example but far better is Jeff's suggestion to use Creative Work Series)

     *   workExample P2

  *   The 2016 production of P1 is a Play Series (non-existing subtype for Creative Work Series) P2

     *   P2 starts on date of 4-Jan
     *   P2 ends on date of 29-Feb

  *   The 4-Jan 7:15 performance of P2 is a Theatrical Event E1

     *   workPerformed P2
The problem is that schema lacks vocabulary to link A1 to P2 (or even to E1). We could potentially use the mentions predicate that Eric suggests but the definition of mentions does not match the actual role that A1 plays in P2. And so we need some properties that are missing and that could be attached to either P2 or E1.

In addition to the (pre)visualizations and stage notes, I'm also missing a good way to distinguish between dancers and actors and also between directors, conductors, and choreographers. Nominally I could group them all using the performer or organizer (respectively) predicates and then differentiate among them using roles. But since I have many instances of each this leads to an explosion of 'Event performer Person role Role' sub-graphs. Better would be if I could define actor and dancer sub-properties for performer and similarly director, choreographer and conductor sub-properties for organizer and thereby limit the growth of my triples.

A complication that Tim has pointed out is that the properties of events and entities in schema do not seem to be distinct but rather overlap leading to awkward situations where I'm potentially listing the performers and other property objects in multiple places (i.e., they are weirdly shared between an entity and an event even though the entity takes part in the event and so presumably we'd already have the information in hand from the entity). The point being is where a Creative Work Series ends and an Event begins is difficult to see (or even where a Creative Work ends and an Event begins). And as always in this case A1 is the entity of chief import. Relating events and other creative works back to it is the goal.

Jacob Jett
Research Assistant
Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship
The Graduate School of Library and Information Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA
(217) 244-2164<tel:%28217%29%20244-2164><>

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Richard Wallis <<>> wrote:
Shooting from the hip on this - which is where some worked through examples would help….

I would see:

  *   Hamlet by Will Shakespeare to be a Play (subtype of CreativeWork) - P1

     *   - workExample P2

  *   The 2016 production of Hamlet from the RSC to be a Play P2

     *   - exampleOfWork P1

  *   The 2016 Season of Hamlet at Stratford-upon-avon to be an Event - E1

     *   - workPerformed P2
     *   - subEvent E2

  *   The March 12th 7:15pm performance to be an Event E2

     *   - workPerformed P2
     *   - superEvent E1

Richard Wallis
Founder, Data Liberate<>
Twitter: @rjw

On 3 March 2016 at 15:49, Pete Rivett <<>> wrote:
So would a production be an Event (with start and end dates representing the whole run) with the performances on specific days as subEvents?
[I guess this is akin to a movie being shown at the same theater for 2 weeks].

Can one rely on properties (such as workPerformed, location, performer, duration) being derived from the superEvent (production) without needing to be repeated for each subEvent (performance)?

BTW it seems that the property firstPerformance is too restrictively typed to MusicComposition. Given that workPerformed has type CreativeWork, then surely firstPerformance should be a property of CreativeWork.


From: Richard Wallis [<>]
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 7:19 AM
To: Jacob Jett <<>>
Cc:<>; Myung-Ja Han <<>>; Sarol, Maria Janina Dela Cruz <<>>; Kinnaman, Alex Olivia <<>>; Cole, Timothy W <<>>
Subject: Re: Suggestion for new category

You are right to identify the differences between ‘the play’, productions of the play, and performances of the production.

Much of the structure of this is availably via CreativeWork properties such as hasPart, isPartOf, exampleOfWork, workExample, plus the temporal aspects of Role that would allow you to associate individual contributors to specific stages of the process.

Based upon established patterns, I would advise separating the event (place/time) aspects from the Creative aspects.

As to associating elements of the process that contributed to the combined work, but not part of the final play - I think that is down to how you describe those individual preproduction parts.

Working on some examples as was done for Books, Articles, TVSeries & TVSeason, etc. would help work through these questions and help support a proposal for a Play type


Richard Wallis
Founder, Data Liberate<>
Twitter: @rjw

On 3 March 2016 at 14:54, Jacob Jett <<>> wrote:
That makes perfect sense. However, if we go the 'isPartOf' route don't we loose the contextual component that set and costume sketches and photographs play in the development of the production? I.e., they are not parts of the finished work -- the play -- per se but are deeply involved in the evolution of a performance of the final product.

Wouldn't it make more sense if they were parts of particular Theatrical Events, as just like the performers of said events, costumes and set designs can also vary from performance to performance of the same play.

Jacob Jett
Research Assistant
Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship
The Graduate School of Library and Information Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA
(217) 244-2164<tel:%28217%29%20244-2164><>

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Richard Wallis <<>> wrote:
Not wishing to overload CreativeWork in the subtypes department, but ‘Play’ does seem to be an obvious missing candidate.

I don’t really think the ’Stage’ qualification is necessary. Most of the properties you reference would be inherited from CreativeWork.  The exceptions being some of the more specific contributors such as StageDesigner and WadrobeKeeper.   These could be handled as per some of the roles in the movie industry are - using the Role<> construct.

You could then connect the individual performances to the Play using TheaterEvent if appropriate using the workPerformed property.

On 3 March 2016 at 14:27, Jacob Jett <<>> wrote:
We have a similar use case but also need to account for things like costume sketches and photographs (and same for storyboards, set designs, etc.). Should we just extend the TheaterEvent with new predicates?

Most if not all of those things would be CreativeWorks or subtypes thereof, in their own right and could be considered ‘isPartOf’ of the play.


On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Tim Turner <<>> wrote:
There is a TheaterEvent that could be expanded from this list.<>

From: Webmestre Globetrottoirs [<>]
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 1:05 PM
Subject: Suggestion for new category


I am working on a theater group website.

When trying to code micro-data, I felt that the following schema is missing.

In the “Creativework” schema, could we add “TheaterPlay”, which would have the following properties :

Name – expected type : text – description : the name of the play
Author – expected type : text – description : the author of the play
Director – expected type : text – description : the person who directed the play
Actor – expected type : text – description : the actors of the play
Character – expected type : text – description : the characters of the play
Composer – expected type : text – description : the composer of the music used in the play
Genre – expected type : text – description : the genre of the play (eg : musical theatre, gesture theatre, pantomime, …)
StageDesigner – expected type : text – description : the person who designed the settings
WardrobeKeeper – expected type : text – description : the person who designed or created the wardrobe.

It could be also usefull to create schema related to dance or mime, etc…

Do you think it is possible to do this ?

Thank you for your answer.


Stéphane Reboul

Received on Thursday, 3 March 2016 23:07:23 UTC