Performance Event Type: Definition of the concept

[fjjulien]

Introduction

The concept of a performing arts performance is represented in several classic RDF ontologies, conceptual models and authority files. This key concept is however not represented in Schema.org. Moreover, there are inconsistencies in the descriptions of specific Schema event types associated with the performing arts domain.

The potential solution is to propose to Schema.org the introduction of a new specific event type (as discussed at PAIR-CG meetings on June 2 and September 1). However, many details need to be discussed with the PAIR-CG community before a formal proposal can be made.

This is issue and the proposed solution are contextualized in this Google Doc.

Specific issue: Definition of the concept

Proposed definition: "Public performance of a performing arts work." Définition proposée : « Exécution devant public d'une oeuvre des arts de la scène. »

• "Public performance" is a well-defined term in copyright legislation. All copyright licenses certified by the Copyright Board of Canada refer to "performance in public or the communication to the public by telecommunication [of a work]". Including this terminology in the definition would clearly set the concept aside from a rehearsal or from non-performance activities.
• While the notion of a "performing art work" has yet to be clearly defined, the concept of "work" is unambiguously defined in copyright legislation and in classic RDF ontologies such as FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records).

1. Do you deem the proposed definition conceptually accurate?
2. Are we missing anything? Are there some important "blind spots" that would not fit under this definition?
3. Is it obvious enough that music performances would fit under this concept? Do we need to explicitly state it or can this be implicitly stated with a parent-child relationship with schema:MusicEvent?
4. Is this definition conceptually equivalent to frbroo:F31_Performance, to mo:Performance, and to wd:Q35140?

[mariel-marshall]

Hi Frederic, Thank you so much for opening this up for discussion.

1. Would a "performing arts performance" as you are proposing be on the same hierarchical level as the other more specific types of events already existing in Schema, such as:

   BusinessEvent ChildrensEvent ComedyEvent CourseInstance DanceEvent DeliveryEvent EducationEvent EventSeries ExhibitionEvent Festival FoodEvent Hackathon LiteraryEvent MusicEvent Performing Arts Performance [inserted by author] PublicationEvent SaleEvent ScreeningEvent SocialEvent SportsEvent TheaterEvent VisualArtsEvent

2. Or are you proposing that "performing arts performance" would be a parent category for more specific types. And that things like MusicEvent, TheaterEvent or ComedyEvent would need to be adjusted to be children of it?

3. If I am attempting to markup Cafe Sarajevo, as an interdisciplinary performance experience across theatre, dance, music and VR, how would you imagine it could be marked up using schema.org? Perhaps using specific examples could help.

4. the current model has a hierarchical structure of types which doesn't easily allow for multi type classification, which seems to be a real challenge here.

@drosu what would your suggestion be for addressing these challenges?

There is an "additionalType" to markup an item with multiple types

<script type="application/ld+json"> { "@context": "https://schema.org/", "@id": "#record", "@type": "Book", "additionalType": "Product", "name": "Le concerto", } </script>

[drosu]

Hi @fjjulien , The questions you posed are very interesting, and it needed some time to acquaint myself with some of the relevant legislation and related thinking in the performing arts world. Here are (some of) my thoughts:

1. Defining "Performing arts performance" as a "Public performance of a performing arts work" raises several issues:

1.1. "performing arts work" needs to be defined. Schema.org does not define the term. (There is a recent, July 2021, mention of "performing arts work" in Wikidata, in the definition of "production company", i.e., "company that produced this film, audio or performing arts work", but that the term itself in not defined in Wikidata. The US Copyright Office does use the term, but has a fairly restricted definition of it, which can be consulted here: ) https://www.copyright.gov/registration/performing-arts/)

1.2 "Performance" needs to be defined. Schema.org does not define the term. ( If "performance is not defined, the proposed approach constitutes a circular definition, i.e., one that assumes a prior understanding of the term being defined, as is the case for the definition of "Performance" provided by the Music Ontology, i.e., that a "Performance" is "A performance event.". Incidentally, Schema.org is plagued by the same issue, for example "Event" is defined as "An event happening at a certain time and location, such as a concert, lecture, or festival.". )

1.3 What constitutes a public performance ?

1.4 Are all performing arts performances public ?

The issue of whether "Public performance of a performing arts work" is conceptually accurate cannot be addressed before 1.1. and 1.2 are dealt with.

2. Since there is no global consensus on what constitutes a "public performance" (there is no consensus even in among the Commonwealth countries) the definition of "performance", and that of "public performance" would need to be contextualized.

In Canada, the legal understanding of what constitutes a "public performance" continues to evolve as illustrated by the recent law suits and judicial reviews in this area. Following landmark decisions in 2012, most recently the Federal Court of Appeal that overturned the Copyright Board's interpretation of what may be construed as public performance last year (https://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/480092/index.do) and in April 2021 SOCAN was granted leave to appeal that decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. This is particularly important as the issues being dealt with revolve around the use of web-based technology which are increasingly becoming part of contemporary performing arts practices. The issue being debated might not look like they directly affect performing arts practices, but in fact they are - I can provide more details if needed.

3. 3.1 The short answer is no. Obvious implies that something can be inferred based on the available facts, and in this case the available facts would not be sufficient.

If the issue I raised in my answer to the first question are resolved, from a technical point of view, in order facilitate the classification of a "Music Performance" as a "Performing arts performance", the definition of "Music Performance" would have to contain sufficient information to allow the inference that (a) "Music Performance" is a "public performance" and (2) whatever is being performed is a type of "performing arts work".

3.2. 3.2.1. If an appropriate definition of "Music Performance" is not provided, it would not be possible to infer that a "Music Performance" is a "Performing arts performance", at least as far as as far as technology is concerned. Humans may use additional knowledge they poses in order to fill in the gaps, but in the absence of appropriate and explicit information, human inferences are subject to each persons level of knowledge and method of interpretation. Two people may reasonably reach opposite conclusions depending on their own (subjective) starting premises.

3.2.2 Since "Performance", "Public performance", "Performing arts performance" and "Music Performance" are not defined in Schema.org and therefore there is no explicit connection between them and schema:Event. Without knowing in what way schema:Event is connected (if at all) with "Performance", "Public performance", "Performing arts performance" and "Music Performance"therefore it is not possible to answer this question.

4. The question cannot be answered in the absence of definitions for "Performance", "Public performance" and "performing arts work.".

I'd also add that 4.1 frbroo:F31_Performance is not assumed to be "public" and therefore frbroo:F31_Performance cannot be inferred to be equivalent to anything that has "public" as one of its integral features. 4.2. mo:Performance is described using a circular definition and therefore unhelpful / unusable. 4.3 wd:Q35140 There is an issue here related to the declaration of "performance work" as an exact match to https://www.iflastandards.info/fr/frbr/frbroo#F20

To give a bit more context: wd:performance = "public presentation of a performance work, a play, concert, or other form of entertainment wd: performance work = "creative work in the field of the performing arts (not to be confused with performance artwork)" frbroo:F20 = "This class comprises the sets of concepts for rendering a particular or a series of like performances."

wd: performance work and rbroo:F20 are two completely disjoint ontological categories. wd: performance work could be an instance of frbroo:F20 (which denotes sets of ontological concepts and not their extensions !), but cannot be an exact match for it...

Also, wd:performance is declared to be equivalent to frbroo:F31_Performance and mo:Performance which is problematic for the reasons I mentioned before.

I hope this helps and needless to say, I'd be happy to provide more clarification and to continue the discussion around this very important topic.

[fjjulien]

@mariel-marshall These are very relevant and interesting questions. I opened up another issue to discuss the relationship between this proposed type and other event types. Would you mind copying your questions there, so we can avoid having too many different conversations in this thread?

[fjjulien]

Hi @drosu,

You raise several important questions. I'll do my best to provide elements of answer.

1.1. "performing arts work" needs to be defined

"Performing arts" and "work" are two distinct concepts. "Work" is the central concept, and "performing arts" is the disciplinary domain.

The concept of "work" is has been rather clearly defined over the last two centuries.

• The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1886) offers the following definition: The expression “literary and artistic works” shall include every production in the literary, scientific and artistic domain, whatever may be the mode or form of its expression".
• FRBR defines frbrer:C1001_Work as "A distinct intellectual or artistic creation.". FRBR further declares related concepts as part of the Work-Expression-Manifestation-Item stack.
• FRBRoo describes the equivalent class, frbroo:F1_Work, as: "This class comprises the sums of concepts which appear in the course of the coherent evolution of an original idea into one or more expressions that are dominated by the original idea."
• FRBRoo also has a performing arts specific subclass of works: frbroo:F20_Performance_Work.
• schema:CreativeWork offers this laconic description of the concept: "The most generic kind of creative work, including books, movies, photographs, software programs, etc."

There are surely other useful definitions beyond these.

[fjjulien]

Reply to @drosu

1.2 "Performance" needs to be defined.

There are surely other definitions beyond those of FRBRoo and the Music Ontology. I agree that the circular definition of the Music Ontology is not very useful. For the Linked Digital Future's conceptual model, we defined the concept thusly: "Individual representation of a Performance Work according to a Performance plan in the context of a Performing Arts Production". Here the word "representation" is a useful synonym to avoid the circular definition.

"Presentation" is another common synonym we could use.

Solutions to the circular definition can also be found in other languages. In French, a "représentation" is often defined as the "exécution" of a performing arts work. In Italian, it's "esecuzione".

In the Copyright Act of Canada, the definition is broader than a typical in-person performance:

performance means any acoustic or visual representation of a work, performer’s performance, sound recording or communication signal, including a representation made by means of any mechanical instrument, radio receiving set or television receiving set; (représentation ou exécution)

[fjjulien]

In reply to @drosu

1.3 What constitutes a public performance ?

1.4 Are all performing arts performances public ?

Unfortunately, the term "public performance" is not defined in the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Article 11 of the Convention offers the following:

(1) Authors of dramatic, dramatico-musical and musical works shall enjoy the exclusive right of authorizing: (i) the public performance of their works, including such public performance by any means or process; (ii) any communication to the public of the performance of their works.

I would tend to say that all performing arts performances are indeed public (i.e., the intention of the performers is to represent the work in front of an audience, and the public is specifically invited to attend). A rehearsal may be involve performative activities, but it's not a performance in public. Collective bargaining may offer useful definitions of performance in contrast to rehearsals.