[uf-discuss] Citation: next steps?

[Timothy Gambell]

On Aug 30, 2006, at 8:29 PM, Michael McCracken wrote:

> Is the situation of semantic markup just as bad in the art world as it
> seems to be in my area?

Mike,

Yeah, the semantic markup situation is pretty messy in the museum  
world, too. There are some credible efforts to come to some consensus  
about how we describe works of art, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

> Do you have any examples you could add that show how works of art are
> being marked up on the web?

Markup examples can be found at http://microformats.org/wiki/ 
workofart-examples, documention of formats is at http:// 
microformats.org/wiki/workofart-formats, and brainstorming is at  
http://microformats.org/wiki/workofart-brainstorming.

I'd be happy to add those examples and formats to the citation pages  
on the wiki, but in the name of keeping hCite simple, I figured it  
would be best to keep work of art distinct. My plan was to wait for  
hCite to solidify, and then use workofart as a place for specialized  
art terms that don't have a place in hCite (for example: materials,  
technique, provenance, and location). Or, I could forget about that  
and just try to merge work of art with hCite.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Tim