Re: prevalence of schema.org/Book

Wow, thanks. It's great to see "real data."

Some of the non-book ones are legitimate in other contexts in 
schema.org, specifically:

http://schema.org/Book/price* 	
http://schema.org/Book/priceCurrency* 	
http://schema.org/Book/ratingValue*

Oftentimes properties are "included" in a schema.org schema from other 
areas of the vocabulary, but I don't know if that is required. Could you 
just use:

http://schema.org/ratingValue

? or does it have to be imported into /Book to be usable? If either is 
"valid" (with "validity" having a wide range in schema.org), is one 
preferable, e.g. is adding 'ratingValue' to the Book schema clearer for 
applications that will use the data?

kc

On 1/24/13 7:50 PM, Jason Ronallo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As this group progresses, I thought it might be useful to begin to
> look at how schema.org is already being used for marking up
> bibliographic content. Having more data might help make better
> proposals.
>
> So I took a quick look at some of the data that already exists and
> wrote it up here:
> http://jronallo.github.com/blog/the-prevalence-of-schema-dot-org-book-properties-in-the-wild/
>
> What other questions do folks have that existing data like this might
> help answer? I'm hoping to take a closer look at the Web Data Commons
> corpus eventually.
>
> Jason
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

Received on Friday, 25 January 2013 20:02:10 UTC