Speaking as a metadata (cataloguing in the old money) librarian working in the heart of the publishing industry (as I should do, because that's what I am) I would add:
1. On standardisation, I hope Bib Extend will largely draw on the existing widely used standard ONIX for Books. Two reasons:
a) apart from publishers and their data service partners sitting on mountains of this data that could potentially be opened up somewhat, it's already mapped to MaRC21 so there's automatic cross-sector appeal (see http://www.oclc.org/research/news/2012/05-21.html and http://www.oclc.org/research/news/2010/04-09.html)
b) it's "linked-data ready" because it latches into the DOI model - see e.g. http://www.doi.org/doi_handbook/5_Applications.html#5.4 and http://bitwacker.com/2010/01/19/the-doi-datacite-and-linked-data-made-for-each-other/ - etc. etc.
2. More broadly, the other DOI implementations (CrossRef, DataCite) already have nice ways to output bib citations - is there any way to get Schema.org interested and talking with them?
Schema.org and DOI really ought to play well together - the DOI kernels and extensions are very parsimonious and "lightweight" but have the extra "data smarts" that will make Linked Data less onerous in future...
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Richard Wallis
Sent: 21 November 2012 08:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CODE4LIB] Schema.org and its extension for bib data (was Coins)
On 21 November 2012 07:37, Dave Caroline <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> But... it is no good choosing a random extension if the Search engine
> is or will be blind to that particular method.
> As someone who likes to leverage SEO the "right" way so one does not
> get penalised, some standardisation is needed.
This is exactly what is behind the Schema.org initiative - 'the search engines' (Google, Bing, Yahoo and Yandex) have agreed to recognise structured markup using the Schema.org vocabulary and will expand that recognition over time as the vocabulary evolves.
There is a process, under the wing of the W3C, to propose extensions to the vocabulary to improve it's descriptive capabilities for particular domains.
As Jeff mentioned, this has already occurred in the areas of news,
commerce, jobs. Coming mostly from a groups organisations in those
domains, these proposals were successful as they came with some authority to the [by definition] broadly focused group behind schema.org.
It is for that reason, I formed the W3C Group Schema Bib Extend < http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/> to create such a consensus in the community concerned with publishing bibliographic data on the web. All are welcome to join this group, membership of the W3C is not a requirement.
Elements of this COinS conversation are obviously relevant to such proposals.
*Bit of Background for those new to this:*
* Schema.org <http://schema.org/> introduced in mid 2011 by Google, Yahoo, Bing, and Yandex.
* A generic vocabulary for describing most things in structured data on the web that the search engines will recognise
* By June 2012, Google & Bing report that 7%-10% of crawled pages contain schema.org markup < http://dataliberate.com/2012/06/schema-org-consensus-at-semtechbiz/>
* Schema Bib Extend W3C Group formed Sept 2012 as a short lived group to propose bibliographic (in the widest sense) extensions to Schema.
* SchemaBibEx not just focusing on library needs, includes publishers etc.
- anyone wanting to publish bibliographic structured data on the web.
* Schema.org, due to its broad generic nature will only complement, not replace, other detailed library standards.
* By publishing bib metadata in this way we have at last a way to tell the world, not only the search engines, about our resources using markup that will be broadly understood.
* Using markup 'the world will understand, and can use' underpins the release of WorldCat linked data earlier this year < http://dataliberate.com/2012/06/oclc-worldcat-linked-data-release-significant-in-many-ways/
Founder, Data Liberate
Technology Evangelist, OCLC
Tel: +44 (0)7767 886 005
IM: [log in to unmask]