- From: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 12:36:22 -0400
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Cc: "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>, "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, Chaals from Yandex <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 04:20:13PM +0100, Dan Brickley wrote: >On 2 September 2014 15:38, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote: >> Already in place: >> >> Schema:Book has an illustrator property >> Schema:Movie has director, producer, productionCompany properties > >Glancing through http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relacode.html >there's a lot in there. Are there any super-useful things we're >missing that could be argued for inclusion as first class properties? There is indeed a lot in there, but as I mentioned a few times (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Feb/0095.html being a recent mention) there's also still a whole lot missing, for example, for Comic "colorist" is in the LoC relators, but the other primary roles of interest expressed by Henry and Peter (inker, penciler, letterer) are missing; many Movie / Media roles are missing like best boy, gaffer, grip, hair stylist, makeup artist, welder, construction group head (see http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120338/fullcredits for an exhaustive list from one big movie). >Otherwise having a way to point from a Role to external lists seems a >potentially useful convention (though perhaps overkill). Perhaps overkill, but websites like IMDB feel that there's enough value to expressng the nuanced contributions of the complete cast and crew that they do so. We or other groups could develop and maintain external LD property lists for that purpose, or try to get LoC to add more entries to the MARC relator codes, but I fear that would be a slow path to follow. Taking a quick look at other external vocabs that took a crack at the movie domain, http://linkedmdb.org/ has a small set of roles such as Casting Director, Production Designer, Set Designer, while http://www.movieontology.org/ adds roles like CostumeDesigner, but nobody seems to have a reasonably complete set to use as an external list. Perhaps, as Gregg suggested later in that same thread at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Feb/0104.html, dbpedia is the way to go. while my limited SPARQL attempt "SELECT ?p WHERE { ?p rdfs:range dbpedia-owl:Person } ORDER BY ?p)" didn't show a ton of satisfying results, blindly throwing in http://dbpedia.org/resource/Inker, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Letterer, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Penciler is much more encouraging. >>>>> On 1 Sep 2014, at 15:35, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >>>>>> I was under the impression that creative works would be able to use the "roles" pattern that was discussed [1]. Right now, CreativeWork has author, creator, and contributor. Although there are a handful of common creative roles that come to mind (editor, translator, illustrator), the actual number blossoms quickly when you move beyond books. Movies have a huge number of creative roles; music also has quite a few (librettist, composer, performer, lead singer...). The roles list used by the Library of Congress gives an idea of the magnitude of the problem. [2] >>>>>> kc >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014May/0085.html >>>>>> [2] http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators.html http://dbpedia.org/resource/Librettist redirects to http://dbpedia.org/page/Libretto -- would that be problematic for our purposes? >Another option is to just use native (microdata/rdfa/json-ld) syntax >for additional more detailed properties. If I remember right, multiple >relation types between is a single pair of entities is most awkward in >JSON-LD. > >In RDFa, this seems ok (needs @rel not @property): > >(where ANM is relator code for "A person contributing to a moving >image work or computer program by giving apparent movement to >inanimate objects or drawings"; perhaps not a perfect classification >of Richard Williams' complex role here but enough for an example) > ><p vocab="http://schema.org/" typeof="Movie"> > <span property="name">The Thief and the Cobbler</span> > <link property="sameAs" >href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thief_and_the_Cobbler"/> > <span rel="contributor http://www.loc.gov/loc.terms/relators/ANM"> Pedantic: perhaps that URI should be http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/anm? >If all we want is additional relationship types, then creating an >intermediate Role entity could be rather heavyweight, since RDFa and >Microdata seem to tolerate whitespace-separated lists of properties. I think this (whitespace-separated lists of properties) would work, as long as we provide some guidance to adopters so that most Comics entities in the wild would use http://dbpedia.org/resource/Inker, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Letterer, http://dbpedia.org/resource/Penciler, etc. (Yes, equivalence statements would let the machines work things out if someone else opted to use, say, freebase or another external vocab instead, but I'm thinking primarily of saving the time of the data publishers from having to hunt the IDs down in the first place). Anyone want to take a stab at providing the Movie equivalents for the titanic (heh) list of Titanic contributions?
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2014 16:36:53 UTC