W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > April 2012

Re: How to describe a resource elsewhere?

From: Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:09:23 +0200
Message-ID: <4F8C2813.9040602@tu-cottbus.de>
To: phil.barker@hw.ac.uk
CC: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, lrmi@googlegroups.com
Hello,
On 4/16/2012 4:03 PM, Phil Barker wrote:
> [slight change to subject line to be more generally correct]
>
> Thanks Adrian, that would suggest the first approach I gave.  Is @url 
> being the page itself (I assume the page being marked-up) a general 
> principle for microdata or schema.org?
I would say the @url is for the Thing is described. Would you describe 
some page then is the url of the page. But inside a page you may 
describe other items too (many itemscope annotations). Then @url 
occurrence in that context(item scope) is an URL of that item.

Hope it helps,
Adrian Giurca

>
> Phil
>
> On 16/04/2012 14:52, Adrian Giurca wrote:
>> I would say describing a page is to  describe a CreativeWork/WebPage. 
>> As @url is the page itself I would use @about to store the URL of the 
>> creative content that is described.
>>
>> -Adrian Giurca
>>
>> On 4/16/2012 3:41 PM, Phil Barker wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>> I'm working on some examples for marking up educational/learning 
>>> resources using schema.org (including the proposed LRMI 
>>> properties).  There are quite a lot of catalogue-like services which 
>>> provide some of the best descriptions for learning resources without 
>>> actually providing the resource itself. They are simply there to 
>>> help people find learning resources held elsewhere. A fairly typical 
>>> example would be the National Science Digital Library, with pages 
>>> like http://nsdl.org/search/resource/2200/20110414163807295T
>>>
>>> I can see two options for marking up these pages, 1. add schema.org 
>>> microdata to describe the webpage as it is and say that it refers to 
>>> something elsewhere which is a learning resource with certain 
>>> characteristics, or 2. just add microdata to describe the learning 
>>> resource.  I'ld be interested in any advice/opinions/speculation on 
>>> which might be the best approach, especially if you think there are 
>>> any pitfalls to either approach.
>>>
>>> For the NSDL example, the first approach would give a description 
>>> along the lines of:
>>>
>>> Item
>>> *Type:* http://schema.org/webpage
>>>    url = http://nsdl.org/search/resource/2200/20110414163807295T
>>>    provider = /Item/( 1 )
>>>    publisher = /Item/( 1 )
>>>    creator = /Item/( 1 )
>>>    about = /Item/( 2 )
>>>
>>> Item 1
>>> *Type:* http://www.pjjk.net/organization
>>>    name = National Science Digital Library
>>>    url = http://nsdl.org/
>>>
>>> Item 2
>>> *Type:* http://schema.org/creativework
>>>    name = Learning About Ratios: A Sandwich Study
>>>    url = 
>>> http://www.cteonline.org/portal/default/Resources/Viewer/ResourceViewer?action=2&resid=227315 
>>>
>>>    learningresourcetype = Instructional Material
>>>    creator = ...
>>>    about = ...
>>>    ...etc
>>>
>>>
>>> The second would mark up the page at 
>>> http://nsdl.org/search/resource/2200/20110414163807295T to produce:
>>>
>>> Item
>>> *Type:* http://schema.org/creativework
>>>    name = Learning About Ratios: A Sandwich Study
>>>    url = 
>>> http://www.cteonline.org/portal/default/Resources/Viewer/ResourceViewer?action=2&resid=227315 
>>>
>>>    learningresourcetype = Instructional Material
>>>    creator = ...
>>>    about = ...
>>>    ....etc
>>>
>>>
>>> As I see it,  the first approach has some advantages since it 
>>> acknowledges that the page being marked up is in itself a useful 
>>> resource, and allows us to say some fairly sophisticated things like 
>>> the description on the NSDL page and the "learning about ratios" 
>>> resource being available from different people (maybe under 
>>> different licenses etc.) However it might be over-sophisticated and 
>>> the big search engines might just ignore the information about the 
>>> learning resource. Incidentally, if this approach does have any 
>>> merit, is "about" the right relationship between the two resources?
>>>
>>> The second approach has the advantage of being straightforward, but 
>>> I wonder whether search engines might not deprecate in some way 
>>> pages that claim a URL other than their own?
>>>
>>>
>>> Any comments welcome, thanks.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>> -- 
>>> <http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> *Heriot-Watt University is the Sunday Times Scottish University of 
>>> the Year 2011-2012.*
>>>
>>> We invite research leaders and ambitious early career researchers to 
>>> join us in leading and driving research in key inter-disciplinary 
>>> themes. Please see
>>>
>>> http://www.hw.ac.uk/researchleaders
>>>
>>> for further information and how to apply.
>>>
>>> Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under 
>>> charity number SC000278.
>>
>
>
> -- 
> <http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/>
> Please note new email address:phil.barker@hw.ac.uk
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Heriot-Watt University is the Sunday Times Scottish University of the 
> Year 2011-2012.*
>
> We invite research leaders and ambitious early career researchers to 
> join us in leading and driving research in key inter-disciplinary 
> themes. Please see
>
> http://www.hw.ac.uk/researchleaders
>
> for further information and how to apply.
>
> Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under charity 
> number SC000278.
Received on Monday, 16 April 2012 14:10:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:49:02 GMT