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

Re: Vocabularies for Technical Publishing

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:44:43 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFqjbTYaY07ryHa930q532tBxs3d9jgT-0464GYLDSRO6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kenley Lamaute <kenleyl@microsoft.com>
Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Hi Kenley,

Where are with this, from your perspective?

I like the idea of using 'about', primarily because the 'current' in
'currentProduct' leaves me worrying about stale data. Many sites begin
their life database-backed but then end up 'pickled'/'frozen' for
various reasons (e.g. they're PHP generated and then security holes
lead to the dynamic generation being replaced with a one-time
snapshot).

Can you suggest a final issue list for getting these changes added?

Many thanks,

Dan

On 16 June 2012 08:03, Kenley Lamaute <kenleyl@microsoft.com> wrote:

> ·         aboutProduct and currentProduct warrants further discussion. You
> bring up a good point on simplifying the description, and we may be able to
> simplify the proposal even more by simply using ‘about’ to refer to the
> ‘Product’ item.
>
> The scenario for aboutProduct and currentProduct:
>
> It is very common for steps in technical documentation to vary between
> product versions, and multiple supported versions of a product often exists
> in a marketplace concurrently.
> As a product matures the content for that product version accumulates links
> / popularity. This becomes a problem when a new product releases to the
> marketplace and customers search for information on implementing the new
> product.  Often times newer content is often difficult to find because it
> must compete with legacy content which overwhelmingly appears first in
> search results.
>
> The purpose of aboutProduct and currentProduct is to help search engines
> disambiguate between product versions, and offer newer content for the
> product when appropriate.
>
>
>
> With this in mind, instead of using aboutProduct and currentProduct , a more
> elegant solution may be to refer to the ‘Product’ item using the ‘about’
> property that we inherit from CreativeWork.
>
>
>
> Example:
>
>
>
> Here 'about' describes the Product and version pertaining to the content; as
> well as, version of the most recent shipping product:
>
>
>
> <div itemprop="about" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Product">
>
>       <p>
>
>         <strong>Applies to:</strong>
>
>         <span itemprop="name">Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2</span>
>
>       </p>
>
>       <meta itemprop="model" content="2008 R2"/>
>
>       <meta itemprop="currentModel" content="2012"/>
>
> </div>
>
>
>
> Here 'about' also informs where to get more information on the overall
> concept:
>
>
>
> <span itemprop="about" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/CreativeWork">
>
>       <meta itemprop="name" content="Database management System"/>
>
>       <meta itemprop="url" content="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dbms"/>
>
> </span>
>
>
>
> Interested in the communities thoughts on this. I’ll kick-off a separate
> thread to get input from the community on adding “currentModel” property to
> Product.
>
>
>
> ·         Re: External enumeration: I concur, that using the method
> described in the External Enumeration proposal could work as well. I expect
> that search engines would support both.
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
> Kenley
>
>
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2012 12:45:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 12 July 2012 12:45:16 GMT