Welcome. The assumption being that you are here because you are passionate about archives digital, physical, or both, and how to describe them and their contents in a way that can be easily consumed by search engines and others.<\/p>\n
Using structured data\u00a0ontologies and vocabularies to describe archives and their contents is nothing new, but these approaches are often targeted for use by software and professionals in the archives community. \u00a0The\u00a0intention<\/span> of additionally using the Schema.org vocabulary is to make those descriptions more readily understandable and discoverable in the wider world, leading to more discoverable archives.<\/p>\n The purpose of this group is to identify how the Schema.org<\/a> vocabulary, and its extensions, can be utilised to describe archives and their contents. \u00a0It is clear that there will be need for some\u00a0new or enhanced types and properties to provide adequate descriptive capability for generally sharing information about an archive. \u00a0Hopefully we can form a consensus around a set of these that can become\u00a0a proposal for an archive.schema.org extension to the core Schema.org vocabulary.<\/p>\n As a start, I believe we need to focus on five\u00a0areas:<\/p>\n In the near future I will add proposals into the wiki that have already been suggested from other areas that will give us a start on 2 & 3. \u00a0Meanwhile spread the word and invite others to join this group, start the conversation in the public mailing list<\/a>, or if you have proposal suggestions add them to the wiki<\/a>.<\/p>\n Richard Wallis<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Welcome. The assumption being that you are here because you are passionate about archives digital, physical, or both, and how to describe them and their contents in a way that can be easily consumed by search engines and others. Using … Continue reading \n