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

SoftwareApplication proposal for schema.org

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:17:21 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFpkoS=6eKJmk62Hf0=3p3+DKh77cEYe80aePfZaF9grTw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Hi Adrian, all,

On 24 February 2012 15:14, Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de> wrote:

> Looking on what CreativeWork offers to represent software projects I did the
> below example encoding properties both with RDFa 1.1. Lite and Microdata. I
> used DOAP with RDFa and Microdata with Schema. The example is a a bit long
> but may help.
> In overall I found that  CreativeWork does not define a number of specific
> properties with respect of software work similar with doap:license,
> doap:release, doap:version, doap:revision.
> Is @author same as doap:maintainer ? Or, maybe @editor is same as
> doap:maintainer  I used @discussionUrl same as doap:mailing-list
> Maybe we need http://schema.org/Software or http://schema.org/CreativeWork/Software .

Good timing and a useful discussion. I have just uploaded a proposal
for a http://schema.org/SoftwareApplication plus associated

See http://www.w3.org/wiki/SoftwareApplicationSchema in our W3C Wiki
area. The proposal for now is a PDF attachment, but I've put a brief
summary in the Wiki page too.

It is based on the earlier deployment of a Software Application
vocabulary by the Rich Snippets team at Google, but is not 1:1
identical with that.

The scope is not exactly the same; it does not attempt to describe
opensource projects as such, and (like the rest of schema.org) doesn't
touch on the topic of license description.

Comments welcomed here or in the Wiki,



ps. this proposed SoftwareApplication class was discussed briefly back
in December,
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 15:17:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:22 UTC