- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 00:21:48 +0200
- To: "Evain, Jean-Pierre" <evain@ebu.ch>
- Cc: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@yahoo.com>, Public Vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Thomas Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
+cc: Tom Baker (from Dublin Core) On 30 April 2012 23:02, Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch> wrote: > Author is very specific and has more the meaning of original writer (rNews comes from the press). > > But even creator, in the audiovisual world is not a perfect match although we live with it with the notion of in front vs. behind the camera. > > Anyway, creator is now largely accepted. Then others would inevitably invent new words such as 'originator' or else. Therefore Creator is the best compromise I can think of. In the library world, there's such as thing as the 'marc relator terms', and http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/relators/ gives an account as to how to use them as a specialization of 'dc:contributor'. Here's the full list, http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators.html and here's a smaller list http://lcweb2.loc.gov/diglib/loc.terms/relators/dc-contributor.html that has been mapped to Dublin Core properties (mostly but not entirely to dc:contributor). Perhaps some are a bit niche ('Puppeteer', 'Lithographer', ''Landscape architect', ... but even considered as niches these roles employ thousands of people. I'd like to know more about how these codes are used, ... and think about whether and how they might be represented in a schema.org context (maybe some open/linked library dataset stats would help?). They're pretty close to the http://schema.org/JobPosting work too, being basically coded job names... (for the subset of jobs that contribute to the production of documentable artifacts?). Dan
Received on Monday, 30 April 2012 22:22:17 UTC