- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 19:50:41 +0100
- To: "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On Sep 4, 2014, at 7:36 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: > > There may not be an easy way to do this, but "same content, different format" and "different content but related concepts" may need to be differentiated. +1 plus consider other concepts for FRBR: original work(s), various contributors, deviations, and encodings. Use cases for music, TV, movies, radio. Recordings of sporting events, ... Gregg > Actually, the former now reminds me of the accessibility proposals, which might solve this, since those were focused specifically on different technology capabilities of the same content, so that people needing a particular technology or accessibility feature could know that they were getting the same content, not something different. > > kc > >> On 9/4/14, 11:12 AM, Dan Scott wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 10:08:55AM -0700, Karen Coyle wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 9/4/14, 8:36 AM, Dan Scott wrote: >>>>> How can we express that there is a PDF and an ODT of the same document? >>>> >>>> ... thanks to the workExample / exampleOfWork properties that were >>>> recently added to schema.org, you can express those relationships. See >>>> https://github.com/rvguha/schemaorg/pull/108 for a request to add >>>> examples for those properties to schema.org (where we express that there >>>> are both book editions and movie adaptations of a given novel). >>> >>> >>> My gut feeling is that PDF/ODT is not the same as a book and a movie >>> derived from the book. Would both be coded with workExample? >> >> Hmm, my gut feels differently than your gut. I would say yes, they would >> be coded with either or both of exampleOfWork and workExample. >> >> exampleOfWork: "A creative work that this work is an >> example/instance/realization/derivation of." >> >> Let's add LaTeX to the mix. If you are in the business of running a >> repository of open access scholarly articles, you might want to offer >> LaTeX, HTML, and PDF versions of each article. Each format would exist >> at a different URL*, and they are three different instances of the >> same creative work, right? >> >> * Well, okay, you could use content-negotiation to serve them up at the >> same URL, but that seems unlikely to occur on the normal web. >> > > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600 >
Received on Thursday, 4 September 2014 18:51:13 UTC