Re: Vocabulary for Article

There are a number of subtypes under https://schema.org/Article and
https://schema.org/NewsArticle which would cover these cases.

- Vicki


On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 2:29 PM Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:

> Niels,
>
> As far as Opinionated Articles, you can use
> https://schema.org/articleSection or just use
> https://schema.org/additionalType <https://additionalType> and do the
> following, as many now do:
>
> {
>     "@context": "http://schema.org",
>     "@type": "Article",
>
>
>
>
> *    "articleSection": {        "sameAs":
> "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337
> <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337>",        "@type": "Text",
> "name": "Opinion Editorial"    },*
>     "author": "John Doe",
>     "name": "How to Tie a Reef Knot"
> }
>
>
> {
>     "@context": "http://schema.org",
>     "@type": "Article",
> *    "additionalType":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337
> <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337>",*
>     "author": "John Doe",
>     "name": "How to Tie a Reef Knot"
> }
>
> Hope this helps,
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 1:04 PM Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We already have support for the following:
>>
>> A dictionary term:  https://pending.schema.org/DefinedTerm
>> An encyclopedia entry (when referring to an entry in the context of
>> within the pages of a book or volume form) https://schema.org/Thing or
>> https://pending.schema.org/DefinedTerm
>>
>> However, as now many encyclopedia are in online form, each Online Entry (*Articles
>> written to describe a Thing or DefinedTerm*) in an encyclopedia should
>> be considered an Article https://schema.org/Article because that is in
>> fact how nearly all of them treat their entries now:
>> https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations
>> https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/foreclosure
>>
>> Where each Article can have an author, alternativeHeadline, articleBody,
>> pageStart, pageEnd, pagination, contributors, etc.
>>
>> But as I said earlier, if I were writing a blog or article and wanted to
>> mention a particular entry in an book or volume form ecyclopedia, I would
>> probably wrap that with DefinedTerm and treat the book or volume form
>> encyclopedia as a https://schema.org/CreativeWork as well as probably a
>> https://pending.schema.org/DefinedTermSet
>>
>> Hope this helps clarify a bit more,
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 6:13 AM Michael Andrews <nextcontent01@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see anything in the definition of Article to suggest an article
>>> must be 'objective'. Entire magazines are composed of commentary, which is
>>> perfectly fine. Article covers all types, not just 'news'.  Even the
>>> definition of NewsArticle allows interpretative content.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018, 4:14 PM Niels <nielsl@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is a goid question Laura. Wikipedia, and its predicesser nunpedia,
>>>> are a very special sort of project, aiming to be a collection of entries by
>>>> anyone who has sonething useful to add. Such thing already has a name. A
>>>> wiki. I think it may very well be debated is a wiki page should be seen as
>>>> an article. I personally dont think a wiki page is a type article.
>>>>
>>>> A normal encyclopidia has a publisher and a (number of) author(s). Such
>>>> os much closer to an article.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hans Polak points out a newsarticle should not be confused with an
>>>> opinated article. News is unopiniated, objective. I agree with him. The
>>>> issue is not with calling such work an article, the issue is with the word
>>>> news, which is these days used for pretty much anything.
>>>>
>>>> An article telling us that the cat whom has been stuck in a tree has
>>>> finally been resqued is news. It tells us something new, something we did
>>>> not know yet, as its main intent.
>>>> An article explaining how high cats can climb and from what hight they
>>>> can usually jump, is not news, but is backgroud.
>>>> An article telling us that the cat was stupid to climb in such a high
>>>> tree is not news, but is an opiniated article.
>>>>
>>>> This is all quite obvious, but some news agencies seem to ignor these
>>>> distinctions, likely because news sells, and it sells better than bacground
>>>> stories or opinions. Calling it news sells better.
>>>> But dont let that push you away from the fact that news articles are
>>>> objective in nature, and for now you can mark up encyclopedia entries as
>>>> newsarticle to imply objective information.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "The fact that some newspapers taint their news coverage with their
>>>> political preferences is lamentable, but they're not per definition
>>>> subjective."
>>>> They are not subjective,but they are opiniated. They are not simply
>>>> factual reporting of events. A distinction between an objective report and
>>>> an opiniated article should be made clear by the publisher. The vocab
>>>> should at least accomodate the posibility of making that distinction.
>>>>
>>>> I hope the vocab can be extended to make a seperate type available for
>>>> wiki's.
>>>>
>>>> As for the word news being abused, that is a debate society is finally
>>>> about to have, now that the term fake news has come about. We will probably
>>>> start seeing news agencies reinventing the name of the articles they sell
>>>> to distinct themselfs from less objective compeditors. This is an issue
>>>> much bigger than just the schema.org vocab.
>>>>
>>>> What we could do in schema.org is adjust the description of news
>>>> article, to very clearly state that with newsarticle wemean an objective
>>>> reporting of news. If it is not objective, it should be marked as opiniated
>>>> article instead. That way it is atleast made very clear to anyone using the
>>>> vocab that marking opinated articles as news is faulty use of the vocab.
>>>>
>>>> Hope that helps.
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Niels Lancel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On August 6, 2018 11:36:02 AM GMT+02:00, Hans Polak <info@polak.es>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Good morning,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd say that (ideally) newspaper articles are objective. Opinion
>>>>> pieces are not newspaper articles.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact that some newspapers taint their news coverage with their
>>>>> political preferences is lamentable, but they're not per definition
>>>>> subjective.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, adding "encyclopedic entries" to the description is
>>>>> an excellent idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Hans
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06/08/18 07:31, Laura Morales wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Article" is defined as "An article, such as a news article or piece of investigative report. Newspapers and magazines have articles of many different types and this is intended to cover them all."
>>>>>
>>>>> Would this be appropriate to identify articles such as encyclopedic entries? For example a Wikipedia article? The current definition seems to suggest that an article is some kind of work with a subjective point of view, for example a newspaper or magazine article. What can I use instead to identify an article which is objective and does not contain personal opinions, for example an encyclopedia's article?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>
>> Thad
>> +ThadGuidry <https://plus.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>>
> --
>
> Thad
> +ThadGuidry <https://plus.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>