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

RE: new itemscope or not?

From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 12:12:21 -0400
Message-ID: <52E301F960B30049ADEFBCCF1CCAEF59116D102E@OAEXCH4SERVER.oa.oclc.org>
To: "Cord Wiljes" <cwiljes@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>, <public-vocabs@w3.org>
I agree with your observation: "So schema.org's property "url" should
only be available for "CreativeWork", not for "Thing" as it is right
now."

OTOH, it would be nice if schema:Thing had a "page" property that was
equivalent to foaf:page.

I don't think that one property should serve both purposes.

BTW, This IETF document from 2002 does a nice job of explaining the
"Classical View" vs. the "Contemporary View" of how URIs, URLs, and URNs
relate:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3305

This updated informal understanding of "URL" helped set up W3C's 2005
httpRange-14 decision that showed how http URIs (no longer called
"URLs") could be used to identify *anything*:

http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#httpRange-14

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cord Wiljes [mailto:cwiljes@cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de]
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 6:17 AM
> To: public-vocabs@w3.org
> Subject: Re: new itemscope or not?
> 
> The schema.org specification seems to support Jeff's interpretation of
> the property "url" as "the WWW-address where an electronic copy of the
> thing that s described can be downloaded". From
> http://www.schema.org/Thing:
> 
> Property: url
> Expected Type: URL
> Description: URL of the item.
> 
> Only something that can be downloaded (an information resource) can
> have a URL. So schema.org's property "url" should only be available
for
> "CreativeWork", not for "Thing" as it is right now. A person for
> example can't have a url. A person can have a website (which is an
> information
> resource) and this website has an url. But then I cannot find any
> property like "website" or "homepage" for any of schema.org's classes.
> Combined with the fact that "url" is avalable for class "Thing" (i.e.
> for everything) I suppose that "url" is in fact used ambiguosly:
> 
> A book can have a url where you can download the book's text.
> A person can have a url where you find information about this person.
> 
> Or in other words: "url" means something rather general: "There is a
> web document related to the resource that can be retrieved at this
> url."
> Essentially its just a "see also" to a document on the web.
> 
> Cord
> 
> 
> Am 08.09.2012 04:14, schrieb Young,Jeff (OR):
> > If I was Godz, I would NOT assume they are the same thing. I would
> use
> > schema:url thusly for those decreasingly rare situations where
> > somebody (especially a remote observer) wants to describe something
> > that is honest-to-godz located on the Web. For example:
> >
> > @prefix observer: <http://example.org/observer/> .
> >
> > observer:12345 a <http://purl.org/library/Thesis>;
> > 	schema:name "Architectural Styles and the Design of
Network-based
> > Software Architectures";
> > 	schema:author <http://viaf.org/viaf/26681119>;
> > 	schema:url
> > <http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/top.htm>.
> >
> > As a matter of principle, Roy's (HTML) thesis COULD be upgraded to
be
> > self-describing with some hidden markup (either RDFa 1.1 or
> Microdata)
> > and a trivial Apache rewrite (303 redirect) upgrade to
> www.ics.ici.edu
> > to replace the observer URI.
> >
> > OTOH, if somebody decides that schema:url should be treated the same
> > as "itemid" (Microdata), "resource" (RDFa Lite 1.1), "rdf:about"
> > (RDF/XML), etc. then schema:url is a wasted opportunity and we (i.e.
> > the pedantic observers of reality) would need to find a new
> vocabulary
> > term fill this void.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jeni Tennison [mailto:jeni@jenitennison.com]
> >> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 3:15 PM
> >> To: Ed Summers
> >> Cc: Dawson, Laura; Thad Guidry; public-vocabs@w3.org
> >> Subject: Re: new itemscope or not?
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7 Sep 2012, at 20:03, Ed Summers wrote:
> >>> It would be interesting to know if the HTML spec allowed multiple
> >>> identifiers, similar to how other HTML attributes work:
> >>
> >> "The itemid attribute, if specified, must have a value that is a
> >> valid URL potentially surrounded by spaces."
> >>
> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata/#attr-itemid
> >>
> >> So that would be 'no', not according to spec.
> >>
> >> I've often wondered whether the schema.org 'url' property is meant
> to
> >> be synonymous with itemid. I'm not sure what happens in schema.org
> >> interpreters when you specify one/other/both/multiple urls...
> >>
> >> Jeni
> >> --
> >> Jeni Tennison
> >> http://www.jenitennison.com
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 10 September 2012 16:13:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 10 September 2012 16:13:34 GMT