There is the http://schema.org/mentions property already pointing in the other direction.
Thad and I debated whether The Name of the Rose was http://schema.org/about a poisoned copy of Aristotle’s Poetics a few days ago. Neither of us suggested schema:mentions as an alternative, but I think would have easily agreed if we had thought of it.
Jeff
From: Anke Wehner [mailto:anke.wehner@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 1:29 PM
To: Karen Coyle
Cc: Chaals from Yandex; Simon Spero; Jarno van Driel; Wallis,Richard; Dan Brickley; Peter F.Patel-Schneider; Thad Guidry; W3C Web Schemas Task Force; Dan Scott; Young,Jeff (OR); Martin Hepp
Subject: Re: Person and fictional Re: VideoGame proposal
On 24 October 2014 18:06, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
On 10/24/14 1:57 AM, chaals@yandex-team.ru<mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
Note that Richard's fictionalThing proposal in webschemas already has
something for this - properties saying where the fictional thing is
"first described", and things that reference it (you may not be an
expert on king arthur,
I think I'd prefer dropping the term "first" from that. It requires knowledge that may not be available. I could be describing a story about a the lost city of Atlantis, but not know where it was "first" described. Or I may not have on hand the bibliographic information of the first Discworld book in which he appeared when I need to describe DEATH as a fictional character.
The proposal ( http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/FictionalThing ) has two properties, createdIn for the first and referencedIn for all following, if I understand it correctly. "referencedIn" sounds to me more like "mentioned" than "played an actual role in this work"; the latter I'd call "appearsIn".
Bu anyway, it seems like leaving out the createdIn attribute unless you're sure would solve the "knowledge not available" problem.
What I wonder right now: Is, for example, the Star Wars franchise a CreativeWork?
Anke
--
http://ankewehner.de