Re: Proposal: Promote 'citation' property up to CreativeWork

Hi,

Karen has pointed out the difference between a citation and a
reference. Is it right?

> Richard

+1.

I've quickly tried to modify the example on the ‘Citation’ Wiki page.
Please discard it if it doesn't make sense. It's just a quick thought
:-)

==============================
<article itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ScholarlyArticle">
  <p itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ScholarlyArticle">
    In each of the successively more derived clades Ornithodira,
Dinosauria, and Saurischia, the primitive state was an increasingly
long neck (<a itemprop="citation" href="#ref-1">Sereno, 1991a</a>; <a
itemprop="citation" href="#ref-2">Langer, 2004</a>).
  </p>

  <ul id="references">
    <li itemprop="reference" itemscope
itemtype="http://schema.org/ScholarlyArticle" id="ref-1">
      <span itemprop="author" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
        <span itemprop="familyName">Sereno</span> PD
      </span>
      (<span itemprop="datePublished">1991</span>)
      <cite itemprop="name"><a itemprop="url"
href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3889336">Basal archosaurs:
phylogenetic relationships and functional implications</a></cite>
      <span>
        <cite class="source">Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
Memoir</cite> <span class="volume">2</span>:<span
class="fpage">1</span>
      </span>
      <meta itemprop="referenceID"
content="doi:10.2307/3889336">10.2307/3889336</meta>
    </li>

    <li itemprop="reference" itemscope
itemtype="http://schema.org/Book" id="ref-2">
      <span itemprop="author" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
        <span itemprop="familyName">Langer</span> MC
      </span>
      (<span itemprop="datePublished">2004</span>)
      <cite itemprop="name"><a itemprop="url"
href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?vid=ISBN9780520242098">The
Dinosauria</a></cite>
      <meta itemprop="referenceID"
content="isbn13:9780520242098">9780520242098</meta>
    </li>
  </ul>
</article>
==============================

Best,
Mizuki

-- 

MORITA Mizuki
森田 瑞樹


On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
> Maori,
>
> While it seems logical that some citations would have identifiers, I believe
> that the DOI and the ISBN identify the CreativeWork itself, not the
> citation. This just means that instead of "citationID" you may want a way to
> link the citation to the work it cites, via an identifier.
>
> kc
>
>
> On 5/13/13 5:41 PM, Maori Ito wrote:
>>
>> +1
>> Hi. (I'm Maori. I'm writing to you for the first time.)
>> I'm going to recommend new property 'citation ID'.
>> You marked up some links with URL.
>> If the URL had id, how about using ID property in addition to URL
>> property?
>>
>> E.g.
>> <a itemprop="url" href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3889336">
>> <meta itemprop='citationID' content='doi:10.2307/3889336' />
>>
>> <a itemprop="url"
>> href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?vid=ISBN9780520242098">
>> <meta itemprop='citationID' content='isbn:9780520242098' />
>>
>>
>> Some vocabularies seem to have proposed ID properties.
>>
>> - schema.org/Book > isbn
>> - schema.org/Product > productID
>> - schema.org/Product > gtin13, gtin14, gtin8
>>
>> Especially, ‘productID’ in Thing > Product expect several types of ID.
>> http://schema.org/Product
>> I felt the situation is similar to citation.
>>
>> We proposed schema.org extensions for BiologicalDataBaseEntry and
>> BiologicalDatabase last year.
>> (I'd like to send you details about it later.)
>> Although we made reference property in our vocabularies, if the citation
>> proposal will be selected, I'd like to abolish reference property and
>> promote to mark-up citation property.
>>
>> CUS,
>>
>> Maori
>>
>> (13/05/08 17:12), Martin Hepp wrote:
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On May 8, 2013, at 2:42 AM, Thad Guidry wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 No objections to promoting 'citation' property.  Get 'er done. :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>>>> On 7 May 2013 12:26, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In reflection of the silence around this proposal - do I need to add
>>>>> it to
>>>>> a Wiki page or something?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It sounds like a perfectly sensible suggestion. If you wouldn't mind
>>>> making a little page in
>>>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SchemaDotOrgProposals patterned
>>>> after the others, it would help track things.
>>>>
>>>> (Hmm I see the W3C Wiki template system seems not to be working for us
>>>> any more; the page headers aren't working as they used to)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, let's go ahead with this. I don't think it needs a huge amount
>>>> of discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone here think it would be a *bad* idea to promote the
>>>> 'citation' property to be usable with any CreativeWork?
>>>>
>>>> Note (to offset any potential objections...) that this does not mean
>>>> (a) all creative works _must_ have a citation property (b) nor will it
>>>> stand in the way of us coming up with more expressive ways to model
>>>> different types of inter-work citations.
>>>>
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>>>> ~Richard
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22/03/2013 11:13, "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the first proposal from the Schema Bib Extend
>>>>>> Group<http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/>, consisting of 60+
>>>>>> people
>>>>>
>>>>> >from a broad cross section of publishers, libraries, and others
>>>>>>
>>>>>> interested in enhancing Schema.org's capabilities in the area of
>>>>>> bibliographic and associated resources.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We are working on several proposals.  However this appeared to be an
>>>>>> obvious, simple, uncontroversial proposal to start with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Proposal:
>>>>>> To promote the 'citation' property, currently on the
>>>>>> MedicalScholarlyArticle<http://schema.org/MedicalScholarlyArticle>
>>>>>> Type,
>>>>>> up to the CreativeWork<http://schema.org/CreativeWork> Type.   Many
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> creative work types other than medical, or general, scholarly articles
>>>>>> can and do cite other works.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Although the focus of our group's proposal is obviously bibliographic
>>>>>> works, this change could open up wider opportunities for web pages,
>>>>>> music
>>>>>> (sampling of tracks?), art (description of a collage?), etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More detail of the proposal is available on the group wiki:
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Citation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -Thad
>>>> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------
>>> martin hepp
>>> e-business & web science research group
>>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>>>
>>> e-mail:  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 http://kcoyle.net
> ph: 1-510-540-7596
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
>

Received on Wednesday, 15 May 2013 14:36:43 UTC