W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > May 2010

Re: GoodRelations vs. Google RDFa vs. Open Graph vs. hProduct/hListing: Using GoodRelations in 10 Triples

From: Martin Hepp (UniBW) <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 10:56:09 +0200
Message-ID: <4BDE8FA9.9010406@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Apologies - There were a few minor bugs in the initial markup:
- I forgot the business function.
- The datatype for the price was xsd:string instead of xsd:float.
- The legal name had no language tag.

The correct examples are at

http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/2010-May/000215.html


On 03.05.10 10:38, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
> Dear all:
>
> Some people think that the GoodRelations ontology for e-commerce 
> (http://purl.org/goodrelations/) is powerful, but complex.
> I think it is important for everybody in the community to know that 
> GoodRelations can be as simple (or simpler) than any more lightweight 
> approach for product markup, as long as you compare the same level of 
> granularity.
>
> Below, please find an example of offering a car for sales in just ten 
> (!) triples.
>
> Of course, you can do more with GoodRelations than just encoding a 
> price and carrying the semantics of the product itself in a string.
>
> The important message in here is that simple chunks of data are as 
> simple in GoodRelations as they are in hProduct/hListing microformats, 
> Google's RDFa vocabulary, or the Open Graph product markup.
>
> The key difference is that GoodRelations has a much more extensible 
> and, in my biased ;-) judgement: cleaner, conceptual model so that IF 
> you have more granular data available, THEN you can expose it, and 
> make your products more findable on the Web.
>
> For example, GoodRelations distinguishes between products and product 
> models / datasheets. That allows for powerful linking between 
> individual items and rich technical specifications from the 
> manufacturer's page.
>
> The Open Graph approach seems to use a plain "topic" semantics, which 
> mixes items, datasheets, and offers.
>
> Please keep that in mind and spread the word.
>
> Here is the markup.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Martin
>
>

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business&  web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
          http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
=================================================================

Project page:
http://purl.org/goodrelations/

Resources for developers:
http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations

Webcasts:
Overview - http://www.heppnetz.de/projects/goodrelations/webcast/
How-to   - http://vimeo.com/7583816

Recipe for Yahoo SearchMonkey:
http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations_and_Yahoo_SearchMonkey

Talk at the Semantic Technology Conference 2009:
"Semantic Web-based E-Commerce: The GoodRelations Ontology"
http://www.slideshare.net/mhepp/semantic-webbased-ecommerce-the-goodrelations-ontology-1535287

Overview article on Semantic Universe:
http://www.semanticuniverse.com/articles-semantic-web-based-e-commerce-webmasters-get-ready.html

Tutorial materials:
ISWC 2009 Tutorial: The Web of Data for E-Commerce in Brief: A Hands-on Introduction to the GoodRelations Ontology, RDFa, and Yahoo! SearchMonkey
http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/Web_of_Data_for_E-Commerce_Tutorial_ISWC2009
Received on Monday, 3 May 2010 08:56:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:27 UTC