Meet 20130716

Agenda

• Comments on previous meeting
• Topics
  • Audiobook ready for proposal?
  • Holdings
    • Discussion thread
  • Works relationships
    • Feedback from Dan Brickley
• AOB

Actions

• AudioBook - Complete proposal, reflecting current discussions in meeting and on list, and circulate for comment - Karen & Dan
• Identify from public-vocabs list previous discussions about leasing/loaning that could be relevant to the holdings discussion. - Richard

Call Recording

To view a recording of approx 1 hour call: Click Here
Note: will play using a WebEx browser plugin

Chat transcript from Call

From Antoine to Everyone(04:03:17 PM)
Hi everyone!
From Karen Coyle to Everyone(04:10:31 PM)
no problem
From Karen Coyle to Everyone(04:14:05 PM)
agreed on serials holdings - blob for now, maybe something else inthe future
From Niklas Lindström to Everyone(04:16:04 PM)
IMO, this method of extension is poor. I wrote a bit about it earlier: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/2013Jan/0189.html
From Corey Harper to Everyone(04:19:50 PM)
Niklas: FWIW, I also agree with both your & Jason Ronallo's concerns in that thread.
From Niklas Lindström to Everyone(04:21:00 PM)
See also: http://blog.schema.org/2013/06/schemaorg-and-json-ld.html
From Jeff Mixter to Everyone(04:25:43 PM)
I know I have not been very involved in the actual mock-up work but I would also be willing to help draft a best practices guide
From Rick to Everyone(04:39:20 PM)
http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/ActivityActions
From Jeff Young to Everyone(04:39:47 PM)
http://www.w3.org/wiki/images/6/6a/Actions_in_Schema.org_-_Draft_3.pdf
From Niklas Lindström to Everyone(04:40:40 PM)
.. not entirely impressed by proposals in PDF at w3.org. ;]
From Niklas Lindström to Everyone(04:42:26 PM)
.. There is "makesOffer" linking Organization to Offer.
From Ross Singer to Everyone(04:42:31 PM)
+1
From Richard Wallis to Everyone(04:42:38 PM)
+1
From Antoine to Everyone(04:43:00 PM)
Corey++ Such documentation could be on our wiki :-)
From Robina to Everyone(04:43:03 PM)
yes
From Dan Scott to Everyone(04:44:41 PM)
There is some documentation at http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html for Medical purposes; in theory, schema.org could link to library-specific docs for how to use the base generic types
From Ross Singer to Everyone(04:45:34 PM)
oh nice!
From Corey Harper to Everyone(04:45:57 PM)
Can you repost that link? My WebEx session crashed...
From Ross Singer to Everyone(04:46:29 PM)
http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html
From Corey Harper to Everyone(04:46:36 PM)
Thx!
From Jeff Mixter to Everyone(04:46:41 PM)
There is some documentation at http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html for Medical purposes; in theory, schema.org could link to library-specific docs for how to use the base generic types
From Corey Harper to Everyone(04:47:23 PM)
Yeah, this is exactly what I was lookign to suggest. And Ross, as always, articulated my point much more clearly than I did. :)
From Karen Coyle to Everyone(04:54:24 PM)
I think those DC properties have a different focus -- and are worth considering.
From Karen Coyle to Everyone(04:54:49 PM)
This is frbr-ish, and the DC properties are not
From Karen Coyle to Everyone(04:55:48 PM)
I agree with Corey
From Niklas Lindström to Everyone(04:56:30 PM)
That's the point with DC. It's not FRBRBish.
From Karen Coyle to Everyone(04:56:33 PM)
I think CW as abstract violates open world assumption: http://kcoyle.blogspot.com/2013/06/frbr-and-schemaorg.html
From Niklas Lindström to Everyone(04:57:22 PM)
CreativeWork as it stands in schema.org today is of arbitrary specificity. It's not abstract though, I agree with that, and it should not ne.
From Karen Coyle to Everyone(05:00:14 PM)
we can't have workExample without a Work
From Jeff Young to Everyone(05:01:46 PM)
How about broaderWork/narrowerWork?
From Antoine to Everyone(05:02:38 PM)
Sorry I have to leave now...
From Ross Singer to Everyone(05:03:37 PM)
thanks!
From Dan Scott to Everyone(05:03:49 PM)
Thanks