W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > July 2013

Re: Redefine and reuse?

From: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 10:43:51 -0400
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: kcoyle@kcoyle.net, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20130723144350.GB23260@denials.eastlink.ca>
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 04:03:27PM +0200, Dan Brickley wrote:
> On 23 July 2013 15:55, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:


> >  - not using the terminology of the community is likely to impede adoption
> > of schema.org, as people will look for their terminology and will not find
> > it.
> >
> > The latter problem, in library terms, is called an "entry vocabulary
> > problem." If there were a way to say: "shelf or call number -> use /sku"
> > then it could be solved. In essence, this is a skos:altLabel in
> > functionality, or it could be an owl:sameAs.
> >
> > I suspect that these issues are not specific to the bibliographic world, but
> > they are BIG issues, and not easily solved.
> Yes, big and slippery issues. In this case, it's tempting to suggest
> naming a common super-property. But then we've got 3 terms instead of
> 1, not necessarily progress.

I suspect here one answer is "domain-specific documentation", along the
lines of http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html - if we don't have an
extension mechanism available that allows processors to fall back to
"sku" when they encounter "callnumber", then having a "Documentation for
bibliographic types" page that says "Here's how you mark up items that
you have available for sale or loan using Offer", with examples, should
fill the gap reasonably well. Particularly if said documentation is
available _from_ the schema.org site.
Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2013 14:44:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:00 UTC