W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > June 2016

RE: publisher field for Blogposts and websites

From: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 23:33:35 -0400
To: "'Aaron Bradley'" <aaranged@gmail.com>, "'Richard Wallis'" <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
Cc: "'Elias Kaerle'" <elias.kaerle@sti2.at>, 'Bäck, Gerald' <gerald@baeck.at>, "'schema.org Mailing List'" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
Message-id: <006a01d1c392$09c6a570$1d53f050$@verizon.net>
The StratML standard (ISO 17469-1) includes a <Submitter> element:  http://xml.fido.gov/stratml/references/StrategicPlanISOVersion20140401.html 

 

Owen Ambur

Chair, AIIM  <http://xml.fido.gov/stratml/index.htm> StratML Committee

Co-Chair Emeritus,  <http://xml.fido.gov/> xml.gov CoP

Webmaster,  <http://firmcouncil.org/> FIRM

 <https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur> Profile on LinkedIn | Personal  <http://ambur.net/> Home Page

 

 

From: Aaron Bradley [mailto:aaranged@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 5:27 PM
To: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
Cc: Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at>; Bäck, Gerald <gerald@baeck.at>; schema.org Mailing List <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: publisher field for Blogposts and websites

 

"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 <mailto: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> http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis

Twitter: @rjw

 

On 7 June 2016 at 11:44, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at <mailto: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 <http://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 <tel:%2B43%20664%205107761>  <+436645107761 <tel:%2B436645107761> >
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at <mailto: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 <http://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 <tel:%2B43%20664%205107761>  <+436645107761 <tel:%2B436645107761> >
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 <tel:%28%2B43%29%20512%20507%2053738> 
>> 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 <tel:%28%2B43%29%20512%20507%2053738> 
Skype: elias.kaerle

 

 
Received on Saturday, 11 June 2016 03:34:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 11 June 2016 03:34:12 UTC