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

Re: New proposal: health & medical extensions to schema.org

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 12:16:58 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFoUi_y707AMW1pP8JpbTuXTm5MBumsBuDYBDF=vZP7kqA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
Cc: Aaron Brown <abbrown@google.com>, public-vocabs@w3.org
On 15 May 2012 00:15, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 1. Is this
>
> <span itemprop="name">Dr. John Smith</span>
>
> on the MedicalScholarlyArticle example
>
> going to cause Parsing problems ?  Use of the short form "name" of the Author conflicting with the short form "name" of the MedicalScholarlyArticle within the same ?

In both http://schema.org/Person and http://schema.org/CreativeWork
classes, we see 'name' listed as 'Properties from Thing'.

In http://schema.org/Thing (the most general of all classes), the
property 'name' is defined as 'The name of the item.'

I believe that covers the name of author/person case, and the name of
creative work (incl. scholarly article, medical scholarly article,
etc.) too.


> 2. And where's the ending </p> in the example ... hidden further and just expected ?
>
> I basically worry that the combination of both of those in the example might cause some shortsightedness with any Schema.org parsers themselves.  Is my worry unfounded or will itemscope itself keep everything in check even if there's 1 <div> ?... because there are a whole lotta "name" properties in that 1 example and the scope itself keeps changing through the <div> and stacking along with <span> elements instead ... scary stuff to me.

Looking at the example, it might be clearer if <p> was opened and
closed, and if the closing of each <span> was on its own line, nested,
to show the structure.

But yeah, real-life markup will be chaotic and often broken. As far as
I can see, the example says what it (hopefully) wants to say. It is
easy to get things wrong though, and that's where better tooling and
checkers will help us all.

BTW I was recently talking with Manu Sporny and others from the RDFa
group (RDFa being a close relation of Microdata syntax) about such
tooling, and Manu took some rough prototypes and turned them into
quite a nice tool. Currently it only does RDFa but we could imagine
easily enough having a microdata parser included too:
http://rdfa.info/play/  ... perhaps something like that (where you can
edit examples directly, and *immediately* see the corresponding
extracted data) could help us all get this stuff right? Whenever
experts get confused, we have to think "what'll this be like for busy
webmasters...?".

Anyway, the example looks ok to me. I'll try converting them to RDFa
and put them in this tool, to see how things look that way.

cheers,

Dan
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 10:17:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:49:04 GMT