Schema.org Alignment/Telecon 20111212
|Expected||Tom Baker, Dan Brickley, Stuart Sutton, Bernard Vatant, Ahsan Morshed, Jon Phipps, Dickson Luckose, Antoine Isaac, Kirsten Jeude, Stefanie Ruehle, Corey Harper, Jane Greenberg|
|Date||Monday, December 12, 2011|
|Start Time||11:00 AM Eastern Std Time|
|Participant Access Code||334034|
1. Sources of the mappings
- For DCMI Metadata Terms, the latest-version RDF schemas:
- For Schema.org terms
- The version at schema.rdfs.org appears to be continually updated, and versions are made available in RDF/XML, Turtle, NTriples, and JSON. These versions are slightly more convenient; e.g., when the domain or range of a property is just one class, it replaces the OWL constructs of the schema.org version ("unionOf" statements, using blank nodes) with simple domain or range statements.
2. Publication of mappings
- The [mappings] are published by DBPedia in RDF/XML and linked to from the mappings page maintained by schema.rdfs.org at http://schema.rdfs.org/mappings.html. Should we follow the same pattern?
- Alternatively, should they be published under schema.rdfs.org, like the SIOC mappings at http://schema.rdfs.org/mappings/sioc?
- Alternatively, should they published on a Mercurial repository at W3C being set up for the Web Schemas Task Force? (Does anyone know the status of this?)
- Do we additionally need to publish human-readable mappings?
- Should we follow the pattern used for publishing DCMI Terms documentation, i.e.:
- Assign PURLs to the mappings under the domain purl.org/dc?
- Maintain redirects to the latest, time-stamped versions?
- Alternatively, should we consider other ways to version the mappings -- e.g., using Mercurial or Git?
- What sort of statement should DCMI issue as context? These mappings potentially set a precedent for others. For example, the statement could say:
- Inasmuch vocabularies can evolve, and the understanding of how vocabularies relate to each other can change with experience, DCMI makes no guarantees regarding the stability of the mappings.
- For simplicity, should mapping files fall under the CC0 license ("No Rights Reserved"), http://creativecommons.org/about/cc0?
- These mappings can be published by the "authority" of the Schema.org Alignment Task Group. Do we foresee a need to formalize or routinize the review and publication mappings, e.g., by a re-oriented Usage Board?
3. Reaching agreement on the mapping proposals
- Bernard's proposal http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/Schema.org_Alignment/Mappings
- See http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/Schema.org_Alignment/Mappings_Details
- Process for reaching agreement. Poll this group? On a call or online? Use Usage Board criteria ("To be approved, a proposal needs more than 50% of assigned votes in favor and less than 25% of assigned votes against.")?