- From: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 10:15:25 +0100
- To: Eric Franzon <eric.franzon@gmail.com>
- Cc: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at>, Bäck, Gerald <gerald@baeck.at>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAD47Kz7Ey8p4m0io5JkAJSF7p0Zk8yj+OOmwoLS6DMk=Rd9KhQ@mail.gmail.com>
After some digging I discover that this sensible proposal was accepted and actioned previously in version 2.1. Somehow the change got reversed in a following release. I have raised an issue to get this fix reinstated: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1198 ~Richard. Richard Wallis Founder, Data Liberate http://dataliberate.com Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis Twitter: @rjw On 7 June 2016 at 23:51, Eric Franzon <eric.franzon@gmail.com> wrote: > +1. In addition to small blogs, this relationship exists in large > organizations as well: > > > https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=who+is+the+publisher+of+the+New+York+Times%3F > > Cheers, > --Eric > > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote: > >> "Broadening out the question of the possibility of a publisher being a >> Person or an Organization, to any CreativeWork, that does in this age of >> self-publishing have something [i]n its favour." >> >> +1 to this. The requirements of specific data consumers entirely aside, >> one more than one occasion having Organization as the sole expected type >> has either struck me as limiting, or *has *been limiting. To cite the >> most obvious use case, the publisher of a single-author blog is almost >> always the Person who is that single author, and it's limiting not to be >> able to declare that without either reverting to a text string or using an >> unexpected type. >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Richard Wallis < >> richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote: >> >>> From a Schema.org vocabulary point of view no properties are deemed to >>> be required. >>> >>> In the case of the Google SDTT complaining about missing fields it is >>> advising you on *their* requirements for displaying information about >>> organisations (e.g.. asking for a logo) etc. Questions regarding the needs >>> should be addressed to their developer mailing lists. >>> >>> This list is inly for discussions regarding the vocabulary itself. >>> >>> In the particular circumstance you describe, I would probably not have >>> applied a publisher to individual BlogPostings for which an author would >>> suffice. However I would have associated each post as being ‘partOf’ a >>> Blog which optionally would have a ‘publisher’ reference. >>> >>> Broadening out the question of the possibility of a publisher being a >>> Person or an Organization, to any CreativeWork, that does in this age of >>> self-publishing have something n its favour. >>> >>> ~Richard. >>> >>> >>> >>> Richard Wallis >>> Founder, Data Liberate >>> http://dataliberate.com >>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis >>> Twitter: @rjw >>> >>> On 7 June 2016 at 11:44, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Gerald, >>>> >>>> I agree. Another solution could be to simply accept schema:Person and >>>> schema:Organization as publisher. >>>> >>>> Maybe one of the people maintaining schema.org can comment on that >>>> issue!? >>>> >>>> Best, Elias >>>> >>>> >>>> On 07.06.2016 10:59, Bäck, Gerald wrote: >>>> > Hi Elias, >>>> > >>>> > the interesting thing is, if you put a logo field into the person >>>> entity, >>>> > google validator claims that a logo field is not valid within the >>>> person >>>> > entity:) The conclusion is that persons cannot be publishers, which is >>>> > simply wrong. >>>> > >>>> > My proposal is to get rid of the publisher entity as a requirement, >>>> because >>>> > blogposts and websites still need an author which should be enough for >>>> > private run blogs. >>>> > >>>> > best wishes, Gerald >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > ---- >>>> > DI Gerald Bäck | fb <https://facebook.com/geraldbaeck> | blog >>>> > <http://www.baeck.at/> | devblog <http://dev.baeck.at> | fitblog >>>> > <http://fitness.baeck.at> | +43 664 5107761 <+436645107761> >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Hi Gerald, >>>> >> >>>> >> this is indeed a strange behaviour. I would blame it on the way >>>> Google's >>>> >> structured data testing tool works: it does, as far as i know, not >>>> >> necessarily validate/verify annotations strictly the way schema.org >>>> >> defines them, but more in a way they need the annotations for feeding >>>> >> their Rich Snippets and Rich Cards. >>>> >> >>>> >> So I would assume Google doesn't care about having a schema:Person >>>> as a >>>> >> publisher, but requires a logo (or some kind of picture) to process a >>>> >> beautiful Rich Snippet/Rich Card out of it. >>>> >> >>>> >> Best, Elias >>>> >> >>>> >> On 07.06.2016 08:36, Bäck, Gerald wrote: >>>> >>> Hi, >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I am currently doing my first steps with JSON-LD and try it on my >>>> private >>>> >>> blog. As far as I understand Blogposts do require a publisher field, >>>> >> which >>>> >>> can only be an organisation. But I think it should be possible for >>>> >> persons >>>> >>> to be publishers too, but I also would like to question, that >>>> blogposts >>>> >> or >>>> >>> even Websites do need a publisher field at all. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I tested my blog with Google's Structured Data Testing Tool. >>>> >> Interestingly >>>> >>> enough the tool did not complain about the publisher being a >>>> Person, but >>>> >>> that the publisher entitiy had no logo, which on the other hand is >>>> not >>>> >>> allowed as a field for a person. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.baeck.at%2Fblog%2F2016%2F05%2F30%2FWahlmanipulationen%2F >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I also tested the root of my blog, which is defined as website, >>>> also with >>>> >>> myself as a publisher person. This time the tool was fine with it. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.baeck.at%2F >>>> >>> >>>> >>> thx, Gerald >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> ---- >>>> >>> DI Gerald Bäck | fb <https://facebook.com/geraldbaeck> | blog >>>> >>> <http://www.baeck.at/> | devblog <http://dev.baeck.at> | fitblog >>>> >>> <http://fitness.baeck.at> | +43 664 5107761 <+436645107761> >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> Elias Kärle, MSc >>>> >> Semantic Technology Institute >>>> >> University of Innsbruck >>>> >> >>>> >> ICT - Technologie Park Innsbruck >>>> >> 2nd Floor, Room 3S02 >>>> >> Technikerstrasse, 21a >>>> >> 6020 Innsbruck >>>> >> Austria >>>> >> >>>> >> Tel.: (+43) 512 507 53738 >>>> >> Skype: elias.kaerle >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Elias Kärle, MSc >>>> Semantic Technology Institute >>>> University of Innsbruck >>>> >>>> ICT - Technologie Park Innsbruck >>>> 2nd Floor, Room 3S02 >>>> Technikerstrasse, 21a >>>> 6020 Innsbruck >>>> Austria >>>> >>>> Tel.: (+43) 512 507 53738 >>>> Skype: elias.kaerle >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > *Eric Axel Franzon* > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ericfranzon > Twitter: http://twitter.com/EricAxel > G+: http://http://gplus.to/ericfranzon > Online Business Card: http://ericaxel.magntize.com >
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2016 09:15:54 UTC