W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-data-tf@w3.org > November 2011

Re: @itemid and URL properties in schema.org

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 14:26:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFNgM+ZBGNtUj9_gk0LFdr+1o5C25-HqhN4q1YqvXzRtYOvHZQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Guha <guha@google.com>, HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
On 9 November 2011 14:14, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 10:43:45 -0400
> Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com> wrote:
>
>> Alternatively, schema:url could be a subProperty of owl:sameAs, which
>> after a fair amount of reasoning can yield what you want (in RDF that
>> is). If schema:url really is used to designate the subject, much
>> better to use @itemid in the first place.
>
> Based on the examples at schema.org (for instance, the example at the
> end of http://schema.org/Person), schema:url is basically the same as
> foaf:page or rdfs:seeAlso, not owl:sameAs. Perhaps even foaf:homepage
> (which is an owl:IFP, and thus an indirect identifier).

Or foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf, even? If the thing pointed to is a doc
primarily about the thing.

This seems to be a variant of the eternal perma-thread of RDF:
deciding where and how we care to distinguish between identifiers for
things versus more conventional pages that describe those things. In
it's hash-versus-slash guise, it had people advocating (largely
unsuccessfully) for Web server reconfiguration to send http 303
redirects.

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of someone
mentioning URNs, "URLs not being for identifying real things",
map-vs-territory and http-range-14 approaches 1.

All that aside, it's a pretty common pattern to identify things
indirectly via pages about them; the question generally is how
explicitly we handle the indirection / proxying.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/ is my favourite movie, etc.

Maybe I should've said http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner ? Or
searched around and found http://dbpedia.org/page/Blade_Runner ? Or
realised that this was a 303 redirect from the real deal,
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Blade_Runner ...?

We need markup idioms that allow for people who don't have the time to
chase down "URIs for the real world thing" every time. Maybe
schema:url is for that; I don't know, I wasn't there at the
beginning...

Dan
Received on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 13:27:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 November 2011 13:27:32 GMT