Re: CreativeWork relationships

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:

> WHOA....Before we go down this path... I want to be absolutely clear of
> this discussion thread for Schema.org users and its administrators...
>
> 1. There is a need to relate a CreativeWork to another thing that has or
> contains the same original content as the originating CreativeWork ?  (this
> would be the idea that is different than the idea of an "isBasedOn" ...
> where the original content has not been maintained in the other thing....
> an important distinction between the 2 ideas.)
>

Yes. A CreativeWork could be a general notion, such as "The Lord of The
Rings" that Tolkien wrote, or it could be the notion of a specific variant
or edition (hardcover, audiobook, ebook etc.). While the possible notions
are innumerable (including instances in time), there is practical utility
in describing something general and then linking specific examples to that
– both to avoid descriptive repetition and to enable discovery and various
levels of browsing (very much like Product - model -> ProductModel).

(In the library world we work on making catalog systems use these notions
more directly, to facilitate cataloguing and discovery. As you might guess
though, there is plenty of theory to go around. In the context of schema.org,
we are mostly interested in finding a core, basic notion which is
accessible and useful for many kinds of data publishers.)


> 2. This discussion will not touch or focus on the idea of "isBasedOn" but
> only on the idea of a thing containing the original content..or 99% of
> it... (since "isBasedOn" is considered a separate focus, use case, and
> requires other properties...and its own separate discussion
> thread...correct ?
>

Yes. 'isBasedOn' reasonably covers general notions of derivative works,
including translations, parodies, adaptations (movies) and so on.

(For anyone interested in the details of at least my point of view here, in
July we discussed relationships between these notions and existing Dublin
Core properties in the SchemaBibEx group – see [1]. I think an important
part of that is about the difference between abstraction and
generalization, for which I used a reference to [2].)

Cheers,
Niklas

[1]:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/2013Jul/0008.html
[2]: http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/composition/abstract.htm



>
> --
> -Thad
> Thad on Freebase.com <http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry>
> Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>
>