Re: Proposed new Schema.org type for poetry and fiction

On 2015-03-20 14:12, Wallis,Richard wrote:
> ~Richard
> 
> On 20 Mar 2015, at 13:51, Paul Watson
> <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> This is exactly why I thought I'd open the subject to gather some
>> feedback before starting to draft up an idea! ;)
>> 
>> Yes, it's difficult to try to place a wide collection of types such
>> as Poem, Short Story, etc into the existing schema.org [1]
>> structure. Poems and Short Stories can be (and frequently are)
>> published online on websites and not in Books (or ebooks). And a
>> Book doesn't have to be a written work (it can be a picture book)
>> although obviously the vast majority of books contain writing.
> 
>  Agree
> 
>> A list of possible test cases might include:
>> 
>> * A short story, in the science fiction genre, published on an
>> aspiring author's website (but never published in any book/ebook)
>> * A modernist poem on the subject of cities, published on a poet's
>> website (but also included as part of a self-published book)
>> * A single chapter of a science fiction novel, published on a
>> publishing company's website as a free teaser to entice people to
>> buy the whole book (available in paperback and ebook)
>> * A short piece of fan-fiction about the 'Harry Potter' universe,
>> published on a website that specialises in hosting fan fiction
>> * Shakespeare's Sonnet 18 ("Shall I compare thee to a summer's
>> day?" etc) published on a website (and obviously available in many
>> books)
> 
>  Most of these could be covered with the currently available types &
> properties (genre, about) supplemented by Poem and Chapter types & a
> form property for things like poetry, short-story, fan-fiction, etc.
> 
>> I agree with you (Richard) about the "form" property being needed
>> for more CreativeWork types - we included such a property in
>> theschema.org/VisualArtwork [2] type that I drafted up and which was
>> released a month-or-so ago in the form of the schema.org/artform [3]
>> property. But again, I think we need to be clear about the
>> difference between a "form" property (which describes the form of
>> the item) and the existing "genre" property (which describes the
>> content/style of the item). In your examples "self-portrait",
>> "landscape", and "graffiti" are more probably covered by genre
>> whereas the form properties for such examples might be "oil
>> painting", "acrylic painting", "watercolour painting”.
> 
>  I hadn’t spotted it before, but several of the example values for
> artForm are CreativeWork subTypes - Painting, Sculpture, Photograph
> and some candidate subtypes - Print, Collage, etc. Perhaps
> VisualArtWork should have been a super type for some of these. "oil
> painting", "acrylic painting", "watercolour painting” seem far more
> like formatTypes - similar to as as is used in BookFormatType [13].


It's an ever-present dilemma with creating schema.org Types, I think - 
do you subtype or do you provide what I'd call a "discriminator 
property" (such as schema.org/artform). Schema.org is aimed at both 
specialists (e.g. academia, and people with professional expertise in 
their areas) and generalists (e.g. someone who just wants to blog about 
a painting they saw while on vacation, and they'd like to mark it up 
correctly using schema.org).

A handful of subtypes is probably enough for the generalist, but the 
specialist requires a *much* larger selection that, if presented as 
subtypes, would overwhelm schema.org with thousands of new subtypes. So 
for the specialist a discriminator property is probably the only viable 
way to go.

For example, while I only provided 7 generic example values in the 
schema.org/artform documentation (to make it clear for the lay person 
what the property was for, and to encourage adoption), I use over 40 
different values in schema.org/artform (all linked to the Getty AAT LOD 
URIs) on my website, and my website only hosts the visual artwork of 4 
artists! Getty's vocabularies run to thousands of artforms. And to 
complicate it further, some pieces of artwork on my site have two 
schema.org/artform values (e.g. "collage" and "acrylic painting") to 
handle mixed media work.

Cheers

Paul


> 
> ~Richard
> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> On 2015-03-20 13:40, Peter Krauss wrote:
>> A note about the "taxonomy" of CreativeWork:
>> * I agree that the reuse principle must be adopted when is
>> possible:
>> http://schema.org/Book [4] [10], http://schema.org/Article [5] [2],
>> Blog, etc.
>> can be reused with (or before) Poem, etc.
>> * I understand that Poem, Chapter, Table, Graphic, Formula, etc.
>> can
>> be both: "structural part" and/or "type",
>> "structural part" of a CreativeWork (Chapter of Book, Section of
>> Article, etc.). Ref. NISO JATS standard (the semantic of
>> verse-group,
>> disp-formula, table, etc. as structural parts)
>> "type" of a CreativeWork (Poem is subtype of
>> CreativeWork/Literature)... Ex. Poem and Drama subtypes.
>> IMPORTANT: about "structural part", there are some confusion about
>> "content part" and "concrete part"... I vote to the "content view"
>> over the "concrete view" of a CreativeWork... The tendency nowadays
>> is
>> to use the "content" as reference. See the similar dichotomy at
>> "Media
>> vs Content" in ISSN:
>> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Serial_Number#Media_vs_Content
>> [6]
>> [11]
>> PS: this personal view make sense? There are some related
>> "SchemaOrg
>> directives"? perhaps they are in
>> http://schema.org/docs/extension.html [7] [12]
>> but I not see with clarity...
>> 2015-03-20 10:03 GMT-03:00 Wallis,Richard
>> <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>:
>> I share the concerns that without care, this could explode in all
>> directions.
>> I don’t see the logic of putting something as a subType of
>> Article
>> just to inherit the pagination properties.
>> I believe that the subdivision of CreativeWork types being
>> considered here (poetry, fiction, sonnet, etc.) is somewhat
>> orthogonal to the structures already in place in Schema.org [1]
>> [9].
>> Are not a Book, Article, Blog, all examples of written works?
>> I believe there is a need for some more CreativeWork subTypes -
>> Chapter, & Poem immediately come to mind.
>> I also feel that this proposal is expressing the need for something
>> such as a ‘form’ property for CreativeWork which in this area
>> could be used for novel, poetry, fiction, etc. I would expect that
>> such a property would also be useful for other areas of
>> CreativeWork
>> - perhaps color, B&W, sepia, for photographs - miniature,
>> self-portrait, landscape, graffiti for painting.
>> ~Richard
>> On 20 Mar 2015, at 11:47, <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk>
>> <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 2015-03-20 10:29, Niklas Lindström wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Paul Watson
>> <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 19/03/15 08:52, Anke Wehner wrote:
>> On 19 March 2015 at 09:01, Paul Watson
>> <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi
>> I am thinking about proposing a new schema.org [1] [1] [1] type for
>  poetry,
> 
>>> fiction, and other types of creative writing, as a subType of
>>> schema.org/Article [5] [2] [2], perhaps with an additional
>>> property
>  that can
> 
>>> be used to classify what type of creative writing it is (e.g.
>  poem,
> 
>>> haiku, sonnet, short story, fan fiction, etc.).
>>> Having ways to categorise creative writing would be a good
>  thing,
> 
>>> but I don't think defining them as subtype of Article makes
>  sense
> 
>>> semantically. A poem, novel or movie script is not an article.
>>> How about creating CreativeWork > WrittenWork, moving
>  wordCount,
> 
>>> pageEnd, pageStart and pagination from Article there, and
>  making
> 
>>> Article and CreativeWriting subtypes of WrittenWork?
>>> Regards,
>>> Anke
>> I went for the least disruptive change rather than the most
>> semantically correct one, but if people are happy to create
>> WrittenWork and shift Article to be it's subtype then I'd be
>  happy
> 
>> with that.
>> So, the suggestion as it stands is to create a new type of
>> WrittenWork as a subtype of Article; move wordCount, pageEnd,
>> pageStart and pagination from Article to it's new parent
>  WrittenWork,
> 
>> then create a new subtype of WrittenWork called CreativeWriting,
>  with
> 
>> at least one new property (currently unnamed) that can be used
>  to
> 
>> classify what type of creative writing it is (e.g. poem, haiku,
>> sonnet, short story, fan fiction, etc.). Or should we take the
>> opportunity to create some subtypes of CreativeWriting while
>  we're
> 
>> doing this (e.g. Poem, Story, Script, etc.) instead of using a
>  new
> 
>> property of CreativeWriting to classify the type?
>> These seem like (bibliographic) questions I would like to
>  involve the
> 
>> SchemaBibEx CG [1] in. There is a dedicated mailing list [2]
>  where we
> 
>> could go into depth on this, unless all feel comfortable hashing
>  out
> 
>> the options here. (I did not CC the schemabibex group in this
>  reply.)
> 
>> My spontaneous reaction is that there may be some need for a
>  subtype
> 
>> for textual works. But I am wary about making it vaguely limited
>  to
> 
>> "creative" forms (if "creative" here implies excluding
>  non-fiction,
> 
>> academic essays and such). Anke's basic WrittenWork might be
>  enough.
> 
>> The specific nature of the text can probably be given using
>> http://schema.org/genre [8] [3] [3] (provided a resolution to
>> schema
>  issue 346
> 
>> [3]) in combination with external enumerations? (See e.g. "genre
>  in
> 
>> literature" on wikipedia [4] for the motivation to use genre.)
>  Compare
> 
>> that to the newly introduced property http://schema.org/artform [3]
>  [4] [4],
> 
>> which (as I previously suggested) might be extended to include
>  other
> 
>> forms of expression. (To me, it bears a resemblance to genre,
>  perhaps
> 
>> even being a subproperty thereof.)
>> In any case, the multitude of nature-specific subclasses of
>> WrittenText can explode just as with specific kinds of
>  VisualArtwork
> 
>> (which was the motivation for introducing artwork as opposed to
>  using
> 
>> multiple types directly). I'd really like experienced library
>  folks to
> 
>> chime in, and that we avoid the introduction of anything overly
>> specific here.
>> Cheers,
>> Niklas
>> [1]: https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/ [9] [5] [5]
>> [2]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/ [10]
>> [6]
>  [6]
> 
>> [3]: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/346 [11] [7] [7]
>> [4]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genre#Literature [12] [8] [8]
>  I'd be very grateful for the experienced library folks to chime
>  in!
>  I think we've got to be careful about being confused between form
>  (e.g. the artform property of VisualArtwork or a new property for
>  the proposed new type for potery/fiction) and genre.
>  The former is about the form of the content (for VisualArtwork:
>  Acrylic Painting, Oil Painting, Drawing, Woodcut), whereas genre
>  is about the subject matter of the content (Landscape painting,
>  studio portrait, street scene).
>  This is probably even more apparent for written works where the
>  new 'type' property would hold values such as "short story",
>  "novel", "novella", "Poem", "haiku" (relating to the form of the
>  written work), while the existing genre property inherited from
>  CreativeWork would be for the genre of the content of the written
>  work: "Science Fiction", "Fantasy", "Romance", "Horror", "Literary
>  Fiction" etc.
>  Cheers
>  Paul
> 
>>>>> Links: > ------ > [1] http://schema.org [1] [1] > [2]
>  http://schema.org/Article [5] [2] > [3] http://schema.org/genre [8]
> [3] >
>  [4] http://schema.org/artform [3] [4] > [5]
>  https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/ [9] [5] > [6]
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/ [10] [6] >
> [7]
>  https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/346 [11] [7] > [8]
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genre#Literature [12] [8]
>  Links:
>  ------
>  [1] http://schema.org [1]
>  [2] http://schema.org/Article [5]
>  [3] http://schema.org/genre [8]
>  [4] http://schema.org/artform [3]
>  [5] https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/ [9]
>  [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/ [10]
>  [7] https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/346 [11]
>  [8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genre#Literature [12]
>  [9] http://Schema.org [1]
>  [10] http://schema.org/Book [4]
>  [11]
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Serial_Number#Media_vs_Content
> [6]
>  [12] http://schema.org/docs/extension.html [7]
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://schema.org/
> [2] http://schema.org/VisualArtwork
> [3] http://schema.org/artform
> [4] http://schema.org/Book
> [5] http://schema.org/Article
> [6]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Serial_Number#Media_vs_Content
> [7] http://schema.org/docs/extension.html
> [8] http://schema.org/genre
> [9] https://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/
> [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/
> [11] https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/346
> [12] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genre#Literature
> [13] http://schema.org/BookFormatType

Received on Friday, 20 March 2015 14:44:53 UTC