When Schema.org arrived on the scene I thought we might have arrived at the point where library metadata could finally blossom; adding value outside of library systems to help library curated resources become first class citizens, and hence results, in the global web we all inhabit. But as yet it has not happened.
The recent release of the Schema.org vocabulary (version 3.5) includes new types and properties, proposed by the W3C Schema Architypes Community Group, specifically target at facilitating the web sharing of archives data to aid discovery. When the Group, which I have the privilege to chair, approached the challenge of building a proposal to make Schema.org useful for archives, it was identified that the vocabulary could be already used to describe the things & collections that you find in archives. What was missing was the ability to identify the archive holding organisation, and the fact that an item is being held …
In a session at the IFLA WLIC in Kuala Lumpur – my core theme being that there is a need to use two [linked data] vocabularies when describing library resources — Bibframe for cataloguing and [linked] metadata interchange — Schema.org for sharing on the web for discovery.
Do you have a list of terms relevant to your data?
Things such as subjects, topics, job titles, a glossary or dictionary of terms, blog post categories, ‘official names’ for things/people/organisations, material types, forms of technology, etc.
The latest release of Schema.org (3.4) includes some significant enhancements for those interested in marking up tourism, and trips in general.
For tourism markup two new types TouristDestination and TouristTrip have joined the already useful TouristAttraction
We are [finally] on the cusp of establishing a de facto Linked Data approach for libraries and their system suppliers – not there yet but getting there.
We have a choice between BIBFRAME 2.0, Schema.org, Linky MARC and doing nothing.
Add Schema.org structured data to your pages because during indexing, we will be able to better understand what your site is about.
These TouristAttraction enhancements have significantly improved the capability for describing Tourist Attractions and hopefully enabling more tourist discoveries
There have been discussions in Schema.org about the way Organizations their offices, branches and other locations can be marked up; they exposed a lack of clarity in the way to structure descriptions of Organizations and their locations, offices, branches , etc.
To address that lack of clarity I thought it would be useful to share some examples here.
So why am I now suggesting that there maybe an opportunity for the discovery of archives and their resources?