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

Re: new itemscope or not?

From: Dawson, Laura <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 10:47:31 -0400
To: Cord Wiljes <cwiljes@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
CC: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <345FE729-3AE0-42CD-9DD3-764BEEB8596E@bowker.com>
Dear Cord -

This is music to my ears. It seems inevitable that more identifiers are going to prove to be critical components of Schema. There is a public entity name ID (ISNI) that would be helpful to differentiate & collocate names; there is a similar identifier in the STM world called the ORCID (which is interoperable with ISNI and in fact may actually really BE an ISNI, as they've been allocated for ORCID); there is a text ID (ISTC) that identifies text independent of format; there is of course the ISBN; there is the ISRC, which identifies recordings; there is the ISAN, which identifies addresses. And there is the DOI, which identifies links themselves. 

I've been talking a little with Richard Wallis about the inclusion of identifiers in Schema - there are a couple of models. One of these is to have a separate class of objects called "identifiers"; the other is to have the identifiers as attributes in the schemas themselves. I'm leaning towards the former simply because a thing can have more than one identifier (a book, for example, can have an ISBN and an ISTC; an author can have an ISNI and an ORCID), and a relational model may be more flexible.

But this is still in discussion.

- Laura

Laura Dawson
Product Manager, Identifiers
Bowker
908-219-0082
917-770-6641
laura.dawson@bowker.com


On Sep 7, 2012, at 10:15 AM, Cord Wiljes <cwiljes@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:

> Dear Ed,
> 
> thank you for you answer. I believe there are three factors to consider:
> 
> 1. markup should not get too complicated
> 2. RDF should be as expressive as possible
> 3. Google/Bing/et.al. should be able to process the Microdata
> 
> 1. and 2. will be conflicting goals, where 2 will probably win, in our 
> case. But I wonder if more complicated (more expressive) RDF could 
> confuse search engines to a point where they refuse to process the code? 
> If this is the case we would favor the simple solution.
> 
> I noticed that the examples on schema.org do not use any Microdata 
> "itemid" attributes. Therefore all of the resulting RDF triples have 
> blank nodes. I would like to prevent this by using URIs wherever possible.
> 
> Best wishes,
> Cord
> 
> Am 07.09.2012 15:15, schrieb Ed Summers:
>> The former seems to be more extensible, in that you can add more
>> Person attributes as they become available. The latter seems easier
>> for HTML authors to start to use, if they aren't already using
>> microdata. Perhaps the question of which is "better" might be answered
>> by considering the applications that will use the data, and the
>> context in which the data is going to be published? Do you have a
>> sense of either of those?
>> 
>> //Ed
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Cord Wiljes
>> <cwiljes@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> if I want to describe a book in schema.org: Which of the following two
>>> versions is correct / better?
>>> 
>>> <div itemscope itemtype ="http://schema.org/Book">
>>>    <span itemprop="author" itemscope
>>> itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"><span itemprop="name">Shakespeare,
>>> William</span></span>
>>> </div>
>>> 
>>> Or just:
>>> 
>>> <div itemscope itemtype ="http://schema.org/Book">
>>>    <span itemprop="author">Shakespeare, William</span>
>>> </div>
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Cord
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Cord Wiljes
>>> Semantic Computing Group
>>> Excellence Cluster - Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
>>> Bielefeld University
>>> 
>>> Phone: +49 521 106 12036
>>> Mail: cwiljes@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
>>> WWW: http://www.sc.cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de/people/wiljes
>>> 
>>> Room H-123
>>> Morgenbreede 39
>>> 33615 Bielefeld
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cord Wiljes
> Semantic Computing Group
> Excellence Cluster - Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
> Bielefeld University
> 
> Phone: +49 521 106 12036
> Mail: cwiljes@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de
> WWW: http://www.sc.cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de/people/wiljes
> 
> Room H-123
> Morgenbreede 39
> 33615 Bielefeld
> 
> 

Laura Dawson
Product Manager, Identifiers
Bowker
908-219-0082
917-770-6641
laura.dawson@bowker.com
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 14:48:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 7 September 2012 14:48:03 GMT