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

Re: Redefine and reuse?

From: Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:41:42 +0000
To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
CC: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CE159F7B.8F94%richard.wallis@oclc.org>

The SchemaBibEx Group <http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/>, where most of these discussions are emerging from, is aimed at the broad domain of bibliographic and associated data with libraries being only one, but important, focus.  It has 70+ members and is working its way through the issues of describing resources and resource types using Schema.org as is, plus composing draft proposals for extension where appropriate.

Although we have only offered two [1<http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/CitationPromotion>] [2<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Jul/0013.html>] of these proposals to public-vocabs so far, this approach seems to be working well by reliving this list from the minutiae of library discussion, prior to a draft proposal being shared for discussion and comment.  This particular thread however does demonstrate that we need to, and do, share with a broad as community as possible questions of approach and view of good/preferred practice.

It would be great to have a list of ALL the possible Properties that could be needed for Libraries, to start with, however I suspect a comprehensive version  will not exist until our work is done.  The approach we are taking is to work our way through resources and their state, in the bibliographic domain, that we wish to describe, attempting description with Schema as it is now.  Thus we are identifying what is missing, or not a good fit, to form a basis for draft extension proposals.

With your extensive public library background, we would welcome your input.


From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com<mailto:thadguidry@gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, 24 July 2013 15:02
To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>>
Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org<mailto:public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org<mailto:public-vocabs@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Redefine and reuse?
Resent-From: <public-vocabs@w3.org<mailto:public-vocabs@w3.org>>
Resent-Date: Wednesday, 24 July 2013 15:03

I have a history of working in a large public library system for 7 years.

In general, Libraries, just like the Job Market proposal and others coming up like Real Estate, are all nice special domains with wonderful quirks and needs.  But their needs overlap other needs and what is most important is to discover those overlaps in intent and very close meaning.

Libraries should be treated as a separate domain space because of their special needs.  I would begin thinking about the larger super-properties that would encompass GLAM efforts themselves, but that would be it, I would not try to model GLAM, instead just the L in it.  Schema.org is going to need that going into the long-tail domains.

I would not re-use properties that do not fit the model "exactly" or "very closely".  Instead, I would begin modeling New Properties and Types, and extend off of existing Schema.org schema.

I would consider it to be an unwise choice to try to re-use or re-appropriate existing Schema.org Types and Properties that do not fit well into the special domains.  Re-use where it can be accomplished without redefining, 1st.  Then bring up potential sticking points with existing Schema.org Types and Properties for help from the community and then we can circle back to gain deeper insight into potential merges, etc.

1st and foremost... Do not work in a silo.  Instead, work with the community.

I would like to see a draft of ALL the possible Properties that could be needed for Libraries (do not worry about GLAM yet) and put them up into the Wiki as a work in progress proposal.  That way we can all work together.

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
This is a great example that allows us to get back to the original question, which I think is one for this group. When one encounters a property or class that one would like to use in a way that is "not exactly as initially meant" - what is the preferred approach?

We could:
1) use it, and rely on documentation to clarify our community's use
2) redefine it, so that it fits better into our use case
3) create a super-property or class and a new subproperty or class
4) create a new, unrelated property within our own community space

If there is no overall preference, then does this group want to entertain ad hoc suggestions for changes to definitions of properties and classes?


On 7/24/13 12:59 AM, Martin Hepp wrote:
The serialNumber is in theory meant as a unique item identifier assigned at production or market entrance time, like the serial number of a digital camera, the Vehicle Identification Number of a car, etc.

A library-specific identifier (like shelf locator ID) is not really a serial number. I do not see major problems with using serialNumber this way, but it is not exactly as initially meant.


On Jul 24, 2013, at 9:37 AM, Owen Stephens wrote:

Hi Karen,

How would you see serialNumber mentioned by Wes mapping against library item identifiers?


Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com
Email: owen@ostephens.com<mailto:owen@ostephens.com>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 24 Jul 2013, at 00:15, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:

Wes, I admit that some of this was a bit cryptic - were you suggesting the properties below as a solution? We have looked carefully at the full range of schema.org<http://schema.org>, in particular /Product and /Offer and are aware of these. They do not, unfortunately, satisfy our use case. Should "/Offer" be expanded to be more than "offer for sale" then the concept of a "merchant-specific identifier for a product or service" fits even though the actual term "Stock Keeping Unit (SKU)" is not used in the library community. None of the others represent a local number for an individual item (not product, but single item).


On 7/23/13 2:45 PM, Wes Turner wrote:

  * lookup/index books by a unique (local?) SKU number


WorldCat OCLC supports RDF as RDF/XML, JSON, Turtle, Triples

(e.g Harry Potter as Turtle)

[... semantic web books]

* http://schema.org/docs/full.html
* http://schema.rdfs.org/all.ttl

schema:Thing > schema:CreativeWork > schema:Book

    /isbn -- string literal. ISBN-(10 &&|| 13 ?) number.

    [/sku -- string literal. SKU number] -> schema:Product/sku

schema:Thing > schema:Product

    /gtin13 -- ISBN-13 / EAN UCC-13 / 0UPC-12
    /gtin14 -- GTIN-14
    /gtin8  -- EAN UCC-8

    /productID -- The product identifier, such as ISBN.
                  For example: <meta

    /sku -- The Stock Keeping Unit (SKU),
            i.e. a merchant-specific identifier for a product or service,
            or the product to which the offer refers.

schema:Thing > schema:Product > schema:IndividualProduct

     /serialNumber -- The serial number or any alphanumeric identifier
                      of a particular product.
                      When attached to an offer, it is a shortcut for
                      the serial number of the product included in the offer.

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

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/

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

Thad on Freebase.com<http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry>
Thad on LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2013 14:47:43 UTC

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