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

Re: On using qualified names for properties

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 10:31:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFpsu-0OyRK1CZh+oUOaLzu6SycadBQxwFcM_1ORUFK15Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
Cc: Guha <guha@google.com>, public-vocabs@w3.org
On 10 May 2012 09:36, Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de> wrote:
> Dear Dan,
> Is it any ongoing discussion  with respect of defining URIs for property
> names? Actually Schema.org defines some property names the same as some
> class names (such as aggregateRating vs AggregateRating). I would say that
> URIs and/or qualified names may not necessarily be directly used by the
> webmasters but they are useful to be defined.  Of course a web server may
> consider case sensitive URLs but maybe an agreement  on defining URIs is
> much useful.

If you need a URI for a schema.org property, compose it using
'http://schema.org/' + 'aggregateRating'.

It is not ideal that we have some cases where a class and property
name differ only in capitalization, and we should avoid that in
future. We do stick to the rule that an initial upper case is a type,
and an initial lowercase means a property, and both Microdata and RDFa
Lite have different notations for classes and properties, so this is
not technically ambiguous. But it can be confusing, I agree.

At some point it is reasonable to expect us to publish per-property
pages on schema.org too.

cheers,

Dan
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 08:31:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:49:03 GMT