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

Re: Comment versus UserComments

From: Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 12:27:09 -0800
Message-ID: <CACWrOGYASSGsQR8Fg6FYsiT8w7OgP-aQTFf0N=uA9uFJgQVmEg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, public-vocabs@w3.org
I just wanted to follow up on this. I like the ideas mentioned here...
seeing no further debate can we close on a new Comment type? :-)

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 18:02, Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com> wrote:

> Thanks for these thoughtful comments. I also like that proposed direction
> for Comment.
>
> How about a play of a video, or a favorite of an object, and the other
> non-comment UserInteractions? Do you have any thoughts there?
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:14, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Can we get a couple of sample real-world pages that can guide our
>>> decisions here? Stéphane - do you have something from Drupal 7 maybe?
>>>
>>
>> You can look at the comments of any Drupal 7 site, for example [1]<http://goo.gl/KZShd>.
>> I took the markup of that comment and stripped it down to highlight the
>> relevant type and properties we use:
>>
>> <div typeof="sioct:Comment">
>>   <span rel="sioc:has_creator"><a typeof="schema:Person"
>> property="schema:name" rel="foaf:page" href="http://lin-clark.com">Lin
>> Clark</a></span>
>>   <span property="dc:date" content="2011-10-01T10:12:00+02:00"
>> datatype="xsd:dateTime">Sat, 01/10/2011 - 10:12</span>
>>   <h3 property="dc:title">Wow, big news!</h3>
>>   <span rel="sioc:reply_of"
>> resource="/blog/2011/09/30/schemaorg-rich-snippets-drupal-7-rdfa"></span>
>>   <div property="content:encoded">Wow, big news!. It also looks like
>> Google might have fixed their RDFa parser? It doesn't seem like you are
>> using Rich Snippets module to change the placement of the image's rel
>> attribute, which was required before to get the image to show up. This is
>> great because I'm planning on doing a project that aggregates content from
>> Drupal sites and uses the Schema.org vocabulary to model things... and now
>> people can do it in either RDFa or microdata and still get the SEO benefit
>> from it.</div>
>> </div>
>>
>> Except for the missing schema.org Comment type, some of the properties
>> used above have an equivalent at http://schema.org/CreativeWork:
>> sioc:has_creator => author
>> dc:date => dateCreated
>> dc:title => name
>>
>> A comment body property should be created for the Comment type (I guess
>> it would be called commentBody following the same convention as articleBody
>> for the type Article).
>>
>> sioc:reply_of is used to link to the post the comment is replying to.
>> Looking at http://schema.org/CreativeWork it seems the comment property
>> could be used to link an article to its comments, but this needs to be
>> clarified wrt to UserComments and UserInteraction (already mentioned in
>> this thread). The type Comment could also define a property to refer to the
>> post it replies to, such as 'repliesTo' or 'parentItem' (Review
>> defines itemReviewed for example). This property would be equivalent to
>> sioc:reply_of. Drupal 7 also use the same sioc:reply_of property to link to
>> the parent comment in the case of threaded discussions.
>>
>> Steph.
>>
>> [1] http://goo.gl/KZShd
>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 20:28:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:48:59 GMT