Re: [a11y-metadata-project] Re: is/hasAdaption

Hi Karen, all,

Would that be roughly equivalent to dcterms:isFormatOf [1] ("A related
resource that is substantially the same as the described resource, but in
another format.")?

Whose meaning might be easier to grasp if it was called e.g.
"alternateFormat", and was a symmetric property.. (Since
dcterms:ifFormatOf/dcterms:hasFormat might otherwise kind-of work like
exampleOfWork/workExample, albeit more narrow than our intentions are with
the latter pair.)

I believe that there is value in having all of isBasedOn, exampleOfWork and
alternateFormat (or something like it, like the more general
commonEndeavor). Or at least a similar constellation, and as long as the
terms are clearly differentiated. The goal being to be general enough and
cover a gamut of varied use cases, some using notions of generalizations,
some representing chains of derivatives, and some building clusters of
formats which represent the same content.

(For comparison, I believe that isBasedOn would be (more or less) a
superproperty of dc:isVersionOf [2] and roughly equivalent to dc:source and
prov:wasDerivedFrom [3]. See also some interesting in-depth comparisons at
[4]. I prefer to explicitly relate to existing terms, if possible.)

By the way, I think it'd be good to have the ___domain of exampleOfWork (and
the ___domain and range of alternateFormat) explicitly include Product as well
as CreativeWork. As we've seen in related threads, the more specific a
work, the likelier that is is a tangible product of some sort, rather than
the more general notion of the work (or, granted, being both).

Cheers,
Niklas

[1]: http://purl.org/dc/terms/isFormatOf
[2]: http://purl.org/dc/terms/isVersionOf
[3]: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#wasDerivedFrom
[4]: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dc/


On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:

> Martin, library cataloging has the concept of "other formats" -- the same
> thing in a different format. This has the advantage that you don't have to
> decide which thing was adapted from which other thing, only that they are
> the same content with different technologies.
>
> I don't have a snappy name for it, but "other formats available" seems to
> me to be the right concept.
>
> kc
>
>
> On 10/7/13 11:44 AM, martin.quiazon@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth, a little background on our experience trying to
>> describe the accessibility of our resources on Bookshare.org: When we first
>> tried to generate metadata for the Learning Registry over a year ago, we
>> started from Dublin Core but found that there wasn't a commonly-used way to
>> express these kinds of content relationships. It was Liddy's work on the
>> Dublin Core accessibility module that led us to import isAdaptationOf from
>> the AfA vocabulary, so it seemed a good fit to carry over into the a11y
>> spec. If we didn't import isAdaptationOf/hasAdaptation we'd probably have
>> needed to formulate something similar.
>>
>> Since schema.org does have a wider charter, I'm all for a term that's
>> more universally applicable, but none of the existing schema.org terms
>> really seems to satisfy the need here. isBasedOnUrl seems more properly
>> applied to new works that build/expand upon the referenced resource. For
>> example, at Bookshare, our books aren't derivative or expanded works,
>> they're alternatives that provide print books via a different access mode.
>> If I understand the definition of sameAs, then I don't think it's
>> appropriate either, since (for example) a transcript of a recorded speech
>> is not the same thing as the speech.
>>
>> Using workExample/exampleOfWork is an elegant solution, since it's a good
>> general-purpose property not limited to accessibility. Anything that's
>> useful to a wider range of publishers is going to be more widely-adopted,
>> which is a huge plus. If acceptance into schema.org is expected, then
>> I'd be thrilled to use workExample/exampleOfWork instead.
>>
>> On Friday, October 4, 2013 9:52:00 AM UTC-7, matt.garrish wrote:
>>
>>> and I think we would do better to wait on the exampleOfWork
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'd agree to this approach over using the existing properties. I'd
>>> initially
>>>
>>> read it as grouping manifestations of a single work, but spotted this
>>>
>>> sentence rereading:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  allowing for any schema:CreativeWork description to reference other
>>>>
>>>
>>>  CreativeWorks that it is an example/instance of
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is also a need to know which specific manifestation is being
>>> adapted,
>>>
>>> not just that there is a collection of related manifestations to which
>>> the
>>>
>>> current belongs. The obvious case being pagination in an ebook, braille
>>> or
>>>
>>> large print book. Bookshare, for example, probably doesn't want to just
>>> tell
>>>
>>> its clients that here is a manifestation of an overarching work, but
>>> here is
>>>
>>> a representation of this specific manifestation containing its pagination
>>>
>>> markers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If the "work" can be a "manifestation" in this model, as appears above,
>>> all
>>>
>>> the good.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The ultimate usability will hinge on commonality of identification.
>>> Provided
>>>
>>> something easy like an ISBN for the user to search on, alternatives
>>> could be
>>>
>>> found, but if the reference is a fragment identifier within a page
>>> probably
>>>
>>> not so much. But then the existing property has that limitation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
>
>