Re: progressing VisualArtwork

On 19/08/14 08:41, Dan Brickley wrote:
> On 19 August 2014 00:08, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>> As Paul Watson patiently points out, we're nearly done with the
>> "culture bundle" sketched back in April,
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Apr/0051.html
>>
>> http://schema.org/workPerformed and with
>> http://schema.org/docs/releases.html#v1.9 periodicals and workExample
>> are now merged into the main site. Improving the description of visual
>> works is the last piece of the puzzle.
>>
>> So, yes, let's try to wrap this up for VisualArtwork.
> aka https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/VisualArtwork - I've updated it
> to point to this thread.
>
> earlier discussion of open issues,
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013May/0092.html
>>   I've just updated the old RDFS config, moving it from W3C Mercurial
>> into a github branch,
>> https://github.com/danbri/schemaorg/tree/sdo-visualwork
>> https://github.com/danbri/schemaorg/blob/sdo-visualwork/data/schema.rdfa#L10199
>>
>> I've copied the three RDFa examples in from wiki:
>> https://github.com/danbri/schemaorg/blob/sdo-visualwork/data/sdo-visualartwork-examples.txt
>>
>> ... and updated the (now AppEngine-based) test site:
>> http://sdo-culture-bundle.appspot.com/VisualArtwork
>>
>> This test build looks good so far. Here's what I see as obviously outstanding:
>>
>> 1. conversion of the examples to RDFa and Microdata, and fabrication of a
>> "pre markup" simple HTML version.
> Sorry, I meant to write JSON-LD - we already have RDFa examples. I plead jetlag!

I've just added Microdata and JSON-LD versions of the existing RDFa 
examples to the Wiki at 
https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/VisualArtwork#Example_Markup

I've never actually used JSON-LD before, so would be grateful if someone 
could check them for errors.

Dan: I noticed that the first RDFa example at 
http://sdo-culture-bundle.appspot.com/VisualArtwork had accidentally 
included this first line:

<syntaxhighlight  lang="html4strict"  line  start="1">

This should be deleted from the example as it's part of the wiki markup 
rather than part of the RDFa example.

>
>> 2. artEdition
>>
>> Looking at the RDFS from last time I see I didn't create an artEdition
>> property, in hope we could generalise it.
>>
>> Here's the definition from the Wiki,
>>
>> "The number of copies when multiple copies of a piece of artwork are
>> produced - e.g. for a limited edition of 20 prints, 'artEdition'
>> refers to the total number of copies (in this example "20")."
>>
>> And the example (which assumes the property exists),
>>
>> "<span property="artform">Print</span> from <time
>> property="dateCreated" datetime="1962">1962</time> by Pablo Picasso.
>> Numbered from the edition of <span property="artEdition">50</span>,
>> each signed by the artist in pencil, lower right: Picasso.</p>"
>>
>> To what extent is this concept art-specific? Are similar counts used
>> for other kinds of CreativeWork?
> When we last discussed this, Paul suggested: "To avoid confusion with
> the edition of a book, journal, etc we could change the property name
> for the VisualArtwork type to editionSize to match the CDWA term?"
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013May/0092.html
> ... that looks like a good idea to me. Any thoughts from
> bibliographiticians?
>
> 3. What does this mean for the existing Photograph type? "So my
> proposal is for the 'VisualArtwork' Type to be used instead of
> "Painting" or "Sculpture", and instead of "Photograph"" --- how do we
> express this on the site? Should we make the new properties available
> on Photograph too?

My immediate feeling is that the existing Painting and Sculpture types 
should be marked as deprecated somehow - still valid, but discouraged 
from ongoing use.

Photograph is a different matter - a photograph can be presented as a 
VisualArtwork or as something that is not a VisualArtwork (such as 
Forensic Photography, Medical Photography, etc.)

My feeling is that we should indicate that artistic photographs should 
be marked up as VisualArtwork, while photographs in non-art contexts 
should be marked up with the existing Photograph type. Or publishers 
could use multiple Types.

>
> 4. Comics, another long-in-progress area. Many aspects of describing
> comics are addressed by periodicals. But comics are also quite
> naturally visual artworks. See recent comics-as-periodicals thread,
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Aug/0169.html
>
> Specifically would it make sense for a single thing to be considered
> simultaneously a ComicIssue per
> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Periodicals_and_Comics_synthesis
> draft, and yet also a VisualArtwork? Here's an example from the comic
> discussion in periodicals wiki:
>
>   <div vocab="http://schema.org/" typeof="ComicSeries"><span
> property="name">TRUE BLOOD</span>
>     <div property="about">TRUE BLOOD chronicles the backwoods Louisiana
> town of Bon Temps... in a world where vampires have emerged from the
> coffin and no longer need humans for their fix.</div>
>     <div property="publisher" typeof="Organization">Publisher: <span
> property="name">IDW</span> (<a property="url"
> href="http://www.idwpublishing.com">http://www.idwpublishing.com</a>)</div>
>     <ul>
>       <li property="hasPart" typeof="ComicIssue">Issue <span
> property="issueNumber">13</span>
>         <div property="author" typeof="Person">Author: <span
> property="name">Michael McMillian</span></div>
>         <div property="artist" typeof="Person">Art by: <span
> property="name">Beni Lobel</span></div>
>         <div property="colorist" typeof="Person">Colors by: <span
> property="name">Esther Sanz</span></div>
>         <div property="coverArtist" typeof="Person">Cover by: <span
> property="name">Michael Gaydos</span></div>
>         <div property="letterer" typeof="Person">Letters by: <span
> property="name">Neil Uyetake</span></div>
>         <div property="editor" typeof="Person">Edits by: <span
> property="name">Beni Lobel</span></div>
>         <div>Date published: <meta property="datePublished"
> content="2013-05">May 2013</div>
>         <div property="hasPart" typeof="ComicStory">
>           <span property="description">Jason discovers the reason for
>             Amy's sudden ability to go out in the daylight, but does
>             his best not to think about it.
>           </span>
>         </div>
>       </li>
>     </ul>
>   </div>
>
> Could this ComicIssue (issue 13) usefully have VisualArtwork properties?
>
> While we're at it, how would it look from an e-commerce perspective?
> http://store.hbo.com/true-blood-comic-issue-13/detail.php?p=444005
> --- not entirely hypothetical, since that page has schema.org markup,
> see http://any23.org/any23/?format=ntriples&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fstore.hbo.com%2Ftrue-blood-comic-issue-13%2Fdetail.php%3Fp%3D444005&validation-mode=none
>
>
> I've a feeling we discussed this before but I couldn't find it in the
> mailing list archive: do we consider the entire issue an artwork, or
> just each page? I think we'd want to allow both levels of detail, and
> we have everything that's needed for doing so. We now have isPartOf /
> hasPart to use when multiple creative work entities also compose a
> whole. And in the VisualArtwork design we can also indicate component
> materials, e.g.
> https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/VisualArtwork#Multiple_materials
> describes the materials that make up Tracy Emin's
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Bed
>
> Dan
>
>


Paul

Received on Tuesday, 19 August 2014 17:00:37 UTC