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

Re: metadata about relationships

From: Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 15:46:15 -0800
Message-ID: <CACWrOGb2-CEWMdyRL0j3np81ySCxkRzYLiywiTO7OJRKWhWWoQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>, Will Norris <will@willnorris.com>, public-vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
My intuition is that (1) would be preferable because, eventually, someone
will want to decorate almost every relation between two things with
additional information. In (2) objects eventually end up with twice as many
properties as they'd otherwise have, which I think imposes a lot more
overhead (e.g. knowing that if you specify "performances" you probably
shouldn't specify "actors").

Agree that asking developers would be very useful info.

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 13:50, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> On 23 February 2012 22:40, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > I think it would be nice if the complexity were incremental.... i.e., if
> my
> > site just has a simple list of actors, that's easy to markup, but if I
> have
> > a list of performances (actor + character + etc.), that's still
> possible.  I
> > could see at least two alternatives for that:
> >
> > Allow either Person or Performance as the expected type for Movie/actors
> > Have two separate properties on Movie, one called actors, one called
> > performances, each with the appropriate expected type
> >
> > Any thoughts on which would be better (or other alternatives)?
>
> Different properties feels cleaner somehow to me. But my intuitions
> are all messed up by thinking about this stuff too much. It would be
> good to try both on real-life Web developers...
>
> Dan
>
>
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 23:47:03 GMT

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