- From: Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 11:23:42 +0000
- To: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- CC: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Taking on the brief discussion, I have adjusted the text of this proposal a little. Although, to broaden its applicability, the isPartOf property may best be added to Thing, the proposal currently proposes it as a CreativeWork property. Subject to feedback, and adding a markup example, I will post this on to the WebSchemas Wiki in the next few days. ~Richard. On 07/05/2013 16:09, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org> wrote: >Here are some thoughts about Dan's question of the difference between >Collection and Class. In a sense, this is splitting an arbitrary hair >because both are identifiable sets of individuals. I think there are a >few ways to decide, but ultimately it's probably a matter of perspective >and intuition. > >Perhaps one way to decide the art is to ask whether the individuals have >properties that are peculiar to them being in the my:Foo set or not. If >there are such properties, then my:Foo should be a Class so it can act as >a domain/range on those properties. Another criteria could be whether >my:Foo makes sense as a subclass/superclass of another Class in the model. > >Whether my:Foo can be a schema:Class AND a schema:Collection boils down >to DL or not to DL. I like to be careful about those things, but I can >cope with people who aren't. > >Jeff > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Wallis,Richard [mailto:Richard.Wallis@oclc.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 9:11 AM >> To: Dan Brickley >> Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org >> Subject: Re: Proposal: Collection >> >> > >> >Is this specifically library-like or cultural heritage notion of a >> >collection? Or is it a general purpose data structure for listing >> >bundles of things? My suspicion is that it's the latter, but it could >> >easily be mistaken for a very general purpose mechanism. >> >> You suspect correctly. The need/approach has come the library and >> associated worlds, but it is clearly applicable in a wider context. >> >> A library has a collection of books, a museum has a collection of >> artefacts, etc. However a farmer could have a collection of animals >> >> By making Collection a subclass of CreativeWork it does imply that the >> creation of a collection would be a conscious creative act by a >> creating person/organization. >> >> However the parts of a collection would not always be creative works >> themselves (fossils in a museum, toys and books in a children's >> library, >> etc.) hense the need for isPart to be added to Thing. >> >> >> > >> >If there's a bibliographic / cultural heritage problem we can solve >> >here, while avoiding getting into heavier 'theory of parts' territory >> >(e.g. http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/articles/Mereotopology.pdf) >> >I'd be happy... >> >> I have equal aversion to diving down such deep dark rabbit holes! >> >> Would we not avoid that by indicating that a Thing can be part of many >> collections or none, a Collection can contain zero or any parts that >> may or may not be in other Collections - or am I being naive? ;-) >> >> ~Richard. >> > >> >Dan >> > >> > >> >> Sub-classed to: Thing > CreativeWork > Collection Properties likely >> >> to be used from CreativeWork >> >> * about (e.g. for collection themes) >> >> * contentLocation (e.g. for museum/archive collections) >> >> * creator (e.g. for collection curators) >> >> >> >> New property for CreativeWork (or perhaps for Thing) As a matter of >> >>principle, anything imaginable can be thought of has having parts. >> >>Although we are primarily interested in this property for sake of >> >>modelling collections and multi-part works, a broader treatment as a >> >>property of schema:Thing would be appreciated. >> >> * Property: hasPart >> >> * Expected Type: Thing >> >> * Description: A thing that is part of this CreativeWork. For >> example >> >>things in a collection or parts in a multi-part work >> >> >> >> New property for Thing >> >> This is the same schema:isPartOf property as currently found in the >> >>http://schema.org/WebPage class with schema:CollectionPage as the >> range. >> >> We would like it promoted for broader use, particularly in this >> case, >> >>for use with a Collection Type. >> >> * Property: isPartOf >> >> * Expected Type: CreativeWork or Thing(dependant on choice for >> >>hasPart) >> >> * Description: Inverse of hasPart >> >> >> >> More information and some examples can be found on the >> >> SchemaBibExtend Wiki >> <http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Collection>. >> >> >> >> ~Richard. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2013 11:24:13 UTC