Re: Update: VisualArtwork type proposed in May this year

On 13 August 2013 00:09, Thanigai Vellore <TVellore@art.com> wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> When I try to push changes to the mercurial repo (
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/), I get an "authorization failed"
> error. I use the same account that I use to login to W3C webschema site. Do
> I require any other special permission to submit changes?
>
> Below is the error that I get....
>
> pushing to https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/
> searching for changes
> http authorization required
> realm: W3C Mercurial Repository
> abort: authorization failed
> [command returned code 255 Mon Aug 12 16:05:16 2013]


Investigating. I think there's a mechanism by which W3C accounts have email
addresses, and this list has email addresses, and if they match perfectly
it all works automatically - populating a 'Web Schemas' group with the
participants from this list. But I need to take another look. Do your email
addresses for list + W3C site match exactly?

Dan


>
> -Thanigai.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@google.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 8:37 AM
> To: lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk
> Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org; Tom Morris
> Subject: Re: Update: VisualArtwork type proposed in May this year
>
> On 28 July 2013 14:50, Paul Watson <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > On 27/07/13 15:33, Tom Morris wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Paul Watson
> > <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Some months ago I proposed a VisualArtwork type (details at
> >> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/VisualArtwork)
> >>
> >> I have just made 1 edit to the wiki to change the "materials" property
> to
> >> the singular "material", which is more in line with other schemas (where
> >> properties are described in the singular), and allows multiple materials
> >> used on a single piece of artwork to be marked up individually, e.g.
> >>
> >> <span itemprop="material">Oil</span> and <span itemprop="material">Gold
> >> Leaf</span> on <span itemprop="surface">wood</span>
> >>
> >> Thanigai Vellore has also added their suggestions for a ColorPalette
> >> addition to the VisualArtwork type on the wiki yesterday. I have no
> >> objections to this addition, even though I would not use those
> properties
> >> myself - I can see that it might be useful for certain applications of
> the
> >> schema.
> >>
> >> There didn't seem to be any objection to the VisualArtwork proposal back
> >> in May (
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013May/0024.html)
> >> and several people welcomed/seconded it, and so I was wondering:
> >>
> >> What is the process to move this proposal to full inclusion and
> >> publication on schema.org?
> >
> >
> > I can't help with the process, but I think a more specific property name
> > than "edition" would be useful.  While the descriptive text is clear,
> it's
> > probably not what most people think of when they see the name.
> >
> > I'd also consider "support" or some other alternative to "surface" since
> it
> > often isn't on the surface at all.  You might want to include "Medium" in
> > the description for "Material" as a synonym that people are likely to
> search
> > for.
> >
> > I'm not really thrilled with the color palette proposal. As you
> mentioned,
> > reflective colors, unlike transmissive colors, are entirely dependent on
> the
> > light they are reflecting.  I can't imagine any describing an artwork as
> 30%
> > sky blue and the RGB hex value is going to be meaningless without some
> > reference light source (not to mention digital works using non-RGB color
> > spaces).
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> > Tom - thanks for the advice. I've rewritten the definition of "edition"
>  on
> > the wiki which will hopefully make it more accessible outside the world
> of
> > printmaking:
> >
> > "The number of copies when multiple copies of a piece of artwork are
> > produced - e.g. for a limited edition of 20 prints, 'edition' refers to
> the
> > total number of copies (in this example "20"). "
> >
> > I've also added a mention of "support" to the definition of "surface",
> and
> > rewritten the description of the "material" property to include the word
> > "medium".
> >
> >
> > Can anyone else help with letting me know the process to move this
> proposal
> > to full inclusion and publication on schema.org?
>
> The process is roughly - that the schema.org partners try to keep an
> eye on the list of proposals in the Wiki, and in touch with their
> authors/advocates. We look out for areas of rough consensus and then
> queue things up for a final review by partners during which we look
> for overlaps with other schemas. It is reasonable to expect us this
> process to become more structured and clearly documented. In the
> meantime, I think for this particular schema I'd look for consensus
> that it is reasonably reconciled with the efforts around bibliographic
> description. This doesn't mean that ideas for improvements to Book,
> ScholarlyArticle etc need to be perfected before we can proceed with
> VisualArtwork. Rather that the kinds of discussion we're seeing now
> should happen. So in that sense I think we're on target.
>
> I did make a draft RDFS/RDFa schema file for this,
>
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/file/default/schema.org/ext/visualartwork.html
> ... if you have a W3C account associated with the WebSchemas group it
> should be possible to edit/improve it directly via Mercurial, to track
> the evolving discussion.
>
> Dan
>
>