- From: Hans Polak <info@polak.es>
- Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:40:37 +0200
- To: public-schemaorg@w3.org, pavlym@gmail.com
- Message-ID: <819aed28-a8d2-1162-9b6e-fdb46bcc6524@polak.es>
As Dan already wrote, PlaceOfWorship <https://schema.org/PlaceOfWorship> exists in Schema.org. I don't see how adding more vocabulary would improve schema.org... bearing in mind that PlaceOfWorship is used in between 10 and 100 sites. Having said that, Pavly, I think you can find higher level vocabulary that will help you map what you want to achieve. For instance: CreativeWork <https://schema.org/CreativeWork> (subtypes) can be used for songs and for the bible. Similarly, Organization <https://schema.org/Organization> can be a placeholder for ethnic information through the additionalType <https://schema.org/additionalType> property which exists in all things <https://schema.org/Thing>. Good luck! Cheers, Hans On 09/08/18 22:27, Pavly Mikhael wrote: > Thank you Martin for this great exposition. > I think many of my list can fall into some abstract type, and will use > the additionalType URL if I find any. > Will let you all know if I struggled finding a fit to any item. > > Thank you all > Pavly Mikhael > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:15 PM Mark Chipman <markchipman@gmail.com > <mailto:markchipman@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Many thanks. > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:14 PM Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com > <mailto:mfhepp@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Official extensions mitigate this only at a code-management > level, because the definitions are kept in a separate folder, > but they still clog the main namespace (more or less). > External extensions are possible, but easily confusing, likely > to introduce inconsistencies and redundancies (because they do > not pass a rigorous core schema.org <http://schema.org> > community review). > > If the aim is more to be able to express more granular data > for general purposes while providing schema.org > <http://schema.org> for mainstream search engines, then an > external vocabulary, independent from schema.org > <http://schema.org> (maybe adhering to its meta-model), is IMO > the best way. An then use multi-typed entities to use your > additional elements. > > Best wishes > Martin > ----------------------------------- > martin hepp http://www.heppnetz.de > mhepp@computer.org <mailto:mhepp@computer.org> @mfhepp > > > > > > On 09 Aug 2018, at 20:59, Mark Chipman > <markchipman@gmail.com <mailto:markchipman@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > I thought stuff like this is why extensions to schema.org > <http://schema.org> exist in the first place. Shouldn't > topics like this exist as an extension rather than polluting > the schema with everything under the sun? Can someone verify > this if I'm not mistaken. Thanks. > > > > Mark > > > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:31 PM Martin Hepp > <mfhepp@gmail.com <mailto:mfhepp@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi Pavly, all possible contributors: > > Thanks for your proposals! > > I think it is important to explain that the schema.org > <http://schema.org> community is generally conservative about > adding new elements, because new elements come at a cost: They > make the vocabulary more difficult to learn, use, and manage, > and they increase the risk of unintended side-effects, like > the duplication of alternative elements that are similar to > existing ones. > > > > As a general guideline, we need more specific subtypes only > > > > - if there are, or are likely, applications by major > consumers of the data that will need the additional > specificity, i.e. that will handle entity data differently > based on the specific type. For instance "Parking Lot" and > "Amusement Park" as subtypes of "Place" are needed only if > e.g. Google would display them differently or if they require > additional properties that will be weird at a more abstract > type. But in general, we rather put properties one level > higher in the type hierarchy rather than adding a subtype only > for having a proper place for a property. Otherwise, it will > be perfectly fine to use abstract types like "Place" or even > "Thing". And then there is always the additionalType property > and support for multi-typed entities with external vocabularies; > > > > - if the distinction can be expected to be easily populated, > e.g. because it matches database schemas or HTML templates of > many sites; > > > > AND > > > > - if the distinction cannot be easily reconstructed from > other data sources. For instance, we added a mechanism for > EXIF meta-data when we added the PropertyValue mechanism: > > > > https://schema.org/exifData > > > > This was arguably not really needed, because a search engine > parsing the image data can also extract the same meta-data > therefrom. > > > > This is an edge-case, but I hope you get the idea. Other > examples are pieces of information or meta-data that is > readily available from HTTP protocol meta-data or the HTML DOM > tree. The latter is again arguable, because we might want to > have elements in schema.org <http://schema.org> that can be > reconstructed from HTML, but not from data in other syntaxes. > > > > I hope this is helpful. > > > > Best wishes > > Martin Hepp > > > > ----------------------------------- > > martin hepp http://www.heppnetz.de > > mhepp@computer..org <mailto:mhepp@computer.org> @mfhepp > > > > > > > > > > > On 09 Aug 2018, at 19:11, Pavly Mikhael <pavlym@gmail.com > <mailto:pavlym@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for getting back to me. > > > If schema.org <http://schema.org> can combine with > wikidata.org <http://wikidata.org>, that would be great. > > > Meanwhile, I would much appreciate if you guys can add at > least the following: > > > > > > OrthodoxChurch (Wiki refers to this as Eastern Orthodox > Church), maybe you can name this 'EasternOrthodoxChurch' > > > OrientalOrthodoxChurch > (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q49377), which is different > from Eastern Orthodox Church > > > Biography > > > Excerpt > > > Quote > > > Lyric > > > Song > > > EthnicGroup > > > SaintIcon > > > ChurchRite > > > > > > Notes: > > > • OrientalOrthodoxChurch will be relevant to our > Coptic Orthodox Church. > > > • The ones in red were not in my original list. > > > I will be glad to help if you guys need. > > > > > > Thanks again and have a great one! > > > Pavly Mikhael > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:19 PM Dan Brickley > <danbri@google.com <mailto:danbri@google.com>> wrote: > > > That is quite some list! If we went into such detail (and > we won't) we would be as big as Wikipedia. And in fact > Wikipedia have their own "knowledge graph" called Wikidata.org > that does go into many of these details. We are working out > ways of combining it with Schema.org. > > > > > > That said, you are correct in particular to remind us that > https://schema.org/PlaceOfWorship.only has dedicated subtypes > for a few religions. Perhaps an additionalType property with > https://wikidata.org/wiki/Q2031836 as its value would be a > good fit? > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, 08:45 Pavly Mikhael, <pavlym@gmail.com > <mailto:pavlym@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > Hello Everyone, > > > > > > I'm trying to create structured data for our church > website and was looking for the following vocabulary in > schema.org <http://schema.org> and could not find any of them: > > > > > > Nonprofit (Can be added under Organization) > > > History > > > HistoryOfCopticOrthodoxChurchOfAlexandria (Can be added > under History) > > > OrientalOrthodox > > > OrthodoxChurch (Can be added under PlaceOfWorship) > > > CopticOrthodoxChurchOfAlexandria (Can be added under > OrientalOrthodox) > > > Archdiocese > > > Diocese > > > Bishopric > > > Monastery > > > Monasticism > > > Seminary > > > Coptic (Can be added under Language) > > > Religion > > > Christianity (Can be added under Religion) > > > Group > > > EthnoreligiousGroup (Can be added under Group) > > > Copts (Can be added under EthnoreligiousGroup) > > > EthnicGroup > > > Christian > > > Icon > > > SaintIcon (Can be added under Icon) > > > CanonicalBook (Can be added under Book) > > > LiturgicalBook (Can be added under Book) > > > PrayerBook (Can be added under Book) > > > Bible (Can be added under Book) > > > BibleBook (Can be added under Bible) > > > Chapter (Can be added under Bible) > > > Verse (Can be added under Bible) > > > Apostle (Can be added under Person) > > > Deacon (Can be added under Person) > > > SubDeacon (Can be added under Deacon) > > > Reader (Can be added under Deacon) > > > Chanter (Can be added under Deacon) > > > Archdeacon (Can be added under Deacon) > > > Cantor (Can be added under Person) > > > Clergy (Can be added under Person) > > > Priest (Can be added under Clergy) > > > Hegomen (Can be added under Clergy) > > > Bishop (Can be added under Person) > > > Metropolitan (Can be added under Person) > > > Pope (Can be added under Person) > > > Layman (Can be added under Person) > > > Monk (Can be added under Person) > > > Nun (Can be added under Person) > > > Saint (Can be added under Person) > > > Martyr (Can be added under Person) > > > ChurchFathers (Can be added under Person) > > > Prophet (Can be added under Person) > > > Prophecy > > > Biography > > > Council > > > Heresy > > > Faith > > > Belief > > > Doctrine > > > Tradition > > > Ministry > > > Missionary (Can be added under Person) > > > Spiritual > > > SpiritualBeing > > > Angel (Can be added under SpiritualBeing) > > > ArchAngel (Can be added under SpiritualBeing) > > > ChurchRite > > > Dogma > > > ChurchHymn > > > ChurchChoir > > > Song > > > SpiritualSong (Can be added under Song) > > > Praise (Can be added under Song) > > > Prayer > > > Psalm > > > Fast > > > Feast > > > Sacrament > > > Theology > > > Liturgy > > > > > > Can you please add these if possible. > > > > > > Thanks and have a great one! > > > Pavly Mikhael > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > - Mark > > > > -- > - Mark >
Received on Friday, 10 August 2018 09:41:06 UTC