- From: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@oclc.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 09:57:27 -0500
- To: "Dawson, Laura" <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>
- CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, "Vizine-Goetz,Diane" <vizine@oclc.org>
I was imagining that interlibrary loan would be a 'loan' process between organisations, as against organisations and people - applying the principle of balance between simplicity and expressiveness. ~Richard. On 03/12/2012 09:42, "Dawson, Laura" <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com> wrote: > Interlibrary loan as well > > On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:38 PM, "Richard Wallis" <richard.wallis@oclc.org> wrote: > >> Hi Dan, >> >> Liking the Actions/Activities proposal. >> >> Coming from the library world I would like to see some of the actions that >> come from that world being represented in the emerging vocabulary proposals, >> such as: loan, reserve (sometimes called 'place hold'), renew loan, return, >> obtain licensed access to a resource (eg. Student on a campus to a journal >> article). >> >> Although close to other actions like rent or buy, the actions for gaining >> access to, often free at the point of use, resources via libraries, >> university services, etc. is sufficiently different I believe to warrant >> such representation. >> >> ~Richard. >> >> >> >> On 30/11/2012 19:23, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@google.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks >>> >>> A few things on the schema.org front: >>> >>> 1. Back in April there was some discussion towards an improved model >>> for Actions/Activities. I have just uploaded a new work-in-progress >>> document giving a first minimal version of a new approach, based on >>> discussion amongst the schema.org partners. It is still in rough form >>> but there should be enough to give a good impression of the thinking >>> behind it. The draft describes some vocabulary structures that allow >>> description of potential/possible future actions, as well as >>> actions/activities that have occurred. While this touches on themes >>> addressed by a variety of other efforts (including but not limited to >>> RSS/Atom/ActivityStreams for past-tense 'activities'; Good Relations >>> for commerce-related action opportunities; WebIntents, ...), we have >>> focussed for now on describing a basic core structure that balances >>> simplicity and expressiveness. >>> >>> A fairly short PDF document >>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/images/7/79/Schema.orgActionsMinimaldraft.pdf >>> is linked from http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/ActivityActions >>> >>> >>> 2. The Audience proposal; based on the RDFa schema in >>> https://bitbucket.org/elderos/schemaorg/src I've built a test version >>> of the schema.org site that includes the Audience proposal (see >>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Audience ). The draft site is at >>> http://sdo99a.appspot.com e.g. see http://sdo99a.appspot.com/Audience >>> >>> This is the second use of the HTML+RDFa+RDFS extension machinery I >>> mentioned recently >>> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2012Nov/0011.html). >>> More should follow - there are quite a few proposals pretty much >>> ready, so I'll first put them up as individual test sites for review. >>> >>> >>> 3. Class/Property >>> >>> There are several cases (including the above-mentioned Actions draft) >>> where it is useful within schema.org to have a first class type >>> representing the notion of 'Class', and of 'Property'. This is rather >>> meta and while it is not something designed for mainstream webmasters >>> to encounter, it will help with structuring and documenting the >>> vocabulary. >>> >>> I have written up a proposal for adding these (and aliasing them to >>> rdfs:Class, rdf:Property) at >>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SchemaDotOrgMetaSchema ...alongside >>> a proposal to use schema.org/domainIncludes and >>> schema.org/rangeIncludes in our RDFa representation of the schema. >>> >>> >>> Comments on any / all of the above are welcomed; ideally in the >>> WebSchemas area of the W3C wiki or here on public-vocabs. If you reply >>> by mail please adjust the Subject line to match your topic... >>> >>> cheers, >>> >>> Dan >> >> >> >
Received on Monday, 3 December 2012 14:58:45 UTC