W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > August 2012

Re: Proposal for an additional term: mediaType

From: Dawson, Laura <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 09:19:22 -0400
To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Public Vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>, "Suliman, Suraiya H" <suraiya.h.suliman@lmco.com>, Greg Grossmeier <greg@creativecommons.org>, Thomas Baker <tom@tombaker.org>, Stuart Sutton <sasutton@dublincore.net>
Message-ID: <D28C5183-7BB7-4A2A-B435-D5E2C665B8CA@bowker.com>
I think we'll be playing around with this a bit at Bowker, and try to prove it out either way. I'm working with some folks at OCLC (one is Diane Vizine-Goetz, who is heavily involved in FRBR) to put together some tests for various use cases for identifiers in Schema. The thing about ISTC is that it doesn't identify a product or a format or even a "type", but it comes very close to identifying an abstraction. It may be that "type" can reliably be inferred; on the other hand, inference is not always reciprocal, so I do take your point.

On Aug 29, 2012, at 3:54 AM, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org<mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote:

IMO, the identifiers you mention should be attached to the respective entities, but not used as an indirect means to represent the type of the entity.
Just my two cents

On Aug 28, 2012, at 1:33 PM, Dawson, Laura wrote:

Could identifiers help with this issue? In the commercial book world we have ISTC, which identifies a textual work. This is distinct from the ISBN, which identifies an edition specific to a carrier (or a "container", as we're coming to call it). ISTC merely identifies the string of text, independent of the carrier. So one ISTC could have many ISBNs related to it.

It's a lot less rigid than FRBR - less hierarchical and more "webby".

On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:38 AM, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@danbri.org<mailto:danbri@danbri.org>> wrote:

Thanks all. Yes, FRBR is quite another level of complexity, although
it is driven by the same concerns Richard mentioned - the concern to
distinguish works in the abstract from the particularities of their
various practical forms. And to be able to describe useful properties
of both without getting into a muddle.

These are not new distinctions and as Martin and Ivan point out, we
should take care not to re-use existing phrases (like 'media type') in
unfamiliar ways. Or for that matter to arbitrarily introduce new
wording for existing concepts; or if we do, at least we should
document the relationships.

Dublin Core makes some related distinctions. Compare ...

"The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource."
"Examples of dimensions include size and duration. Recommended best
practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as the list of
Internet Media Types [MIME]."

"The nature or genre of the resource."
"Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as
the DCMI Type Vocabulary [DCMITYPE]. To describe the file format,
physical medium, or dimensions of the resource, use the Format

A fairly short list of DCMI Types seems to be at
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-type-vocabulary/#H6 (scroll down
a bit...) or see also

I didn't find a list yet corresponding to the granularity of Greg's
request, but maybe I missed it. Tom, Stuart ... any pointers?

>From Greg's mail...

- Audio CD
- Audiotape
- Calculator
- CD-I
- Diskette
- Duplication Master
- DVD/ Blu-ray
- etc

These seem closer to 'dc:format' to me, but also seem to emphasise
supporting physical hardware - rather than types of media. I find it
hard to think of 'Calculator' as a media type, for example.

Greg, Suraiya, ... can you say a bit more about your usage scenario?
What kind of record would 'Calculator' or 'Duplication Master' appear
in, for example?



martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org<mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
        http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/

Laura Dawson
Product Manager, Identifiers
Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2012 13:20:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:48:47 UTC