W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > July 2013

Re: Schema.org Actions - an update and call for review

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:35:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7RbdhSDmMu+EmWSBPzgtvk1JUi6pbicJWW9rS4HOJ0n3kOg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Goto <goto@google.com>
Cc: Chris Messina <messina@google.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
So far everything looks right on track, and where gaps still may
exist, I believe the json-ld mapping support gives us decent enough
coverage.

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Sam Goto <goto@google.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 2:21 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This looks to be a much more solid piece of work than the previous
>> proposals; and, assuming that things progress with my proposed
>> Activity Streams 2.0 update [1], the two models ought to be able to
>> live comfortably side-by-side, which is very good.
>
>
> Thanks James! We took note on every piece of feedback you and Chris gave on
> our last f2f meet up in San Francisco, and I hope you'll find a lot of
> convergence in this new draft: a strong base Action, convergence on property
> naming, convergence on activity types, etc.
>
> Let me know if this doesn't reflect (or if I missed anything) what we
> discussed about a month ago, and I'd be happy to course correct as needed.
> The devils are on the details, so do please take a deep look at the
> individual actions if you have a chance.
>
>>
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/jasnell/json-activity/blob/2.0/draft-snell-activitystreams-02.txt
>>
>> As an exercise, I drafted up a few quick examples using the AS 2.0
>> syntax mapped to the schema.org model, just to make sure that things
>> line up well. (These use a JSON-LD @context to provide the mapping)
>>
>> {
>>   "objectType": "http://schema.org/WinAction",
>>   "verb": "win",
>>   "actor": "acct:joe@example.org",
>>   "object": "urn:example:games:tag",
>>   "startTime": "2013-07-26T12:12:12Z",
>>   "@context": {
>>     "objectType": "@type",
>>     "actor": "http://schema.org/agent",
>>     "object": "http://schema.org/object",
>>     "startTime": "http://schema.org/startTime"
>>   }
>> }
>>
>>
>> {
>>   "objectType": "http://schema.org/ChooseAction",
>>   "verb": "choose",
>>   "actor": "acct:joe@example.org",
>>   "object": "urn:example:options:1",
>>   "options": [
>>     "urn:example:options:1",
>>     "urn:example:options:2",
>>     "urn:example:options:3"
>>   ]
>>   "@context": {
>>     "objectType": "@type",
>>     "actor": "http://schema.org/agent",
>>     "object": "http://schema.org/object",
>>     "options": "http://schema.org/option"
>>   }
>> }
>>
>>
>> {
>>   "objectType": "http://schema.org/WatchAction",
>>   "verb": "watch",
>>   "actor": "acct:joe@example.org",
>>   "object": {
>>     "objectType": {
>>       "id": "http://schema.org/Movie",
>>       "alias": "video"
>>     }
>>     "displayName": "Die Hard"
>>   },
>>   "@context": {
>>     "objectType": "@type",
>>     "id": "@id",
>>     "actor": "http://schema.org/agent",
>>     "object": "http://schema.org/object",
>>     "options": "http://schema.org/option"
>>   }
>> }
>>
>> - James
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>> > Hi all. Last month we circulated a version of Schema.org Actions for
>> > review; the latest in a series of drafts exploring improvements to our
>> > treatment of actions and activities (URLs below). This is an update on
>> > that work, and a call for feedback and discussion as we move towards
>> > finalising a basic Actions type and initial set of specific Action
>> > subtypes. The schema.org team (this is a collaboration between teams
>> > from Microsoft, Yandex, Yahoo and Google) feels it is close to a final
>> > design for describing "past-tense" actions, and encourages detailed
>> > review of this base Actions schema prior to publication on schema.org.
>> >
>> >
>> > The latest version (and also the most recent, June 2013 draft) does
>> > not include action handler mechanisms or a full treatment of
>> > future/potential actions. Instead, we have focussed on solidifying a
>> > basic Action type plus a hierarchy of specific Action subtypes,
>> > alongside a few associated properties. This is intended as a
>> > foundation for the broader framework (future/potential actions,
>> > handlers etc.) presented in earlier drafts. Today's version differs
>> > from the June draft primarily in polish and detail rather than in
>> > broad direction.
>> >
>> >
>> > There is a test build of the schema.org site available for review:
>> >
>> >
>> > * The basic Action type is at http://sdo-actions.appspot.com/Action
>> >
>> > * The overall Action hierarchy can be browsed via
>> > http://sdo-actions.appspot.com/docs/full.html
>> >
>> > * An alternate HTML view is available at
>> > http://pastehtml.com/view/d957mb0uc.html
>> >
>> > * Source files in RDFa/RDFS (ActionBase.html, ActionTypes.html) are in
>> > W3C's WebSchemas mercurial repo,
>> > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/file/default/schema.org/ext
>> >
>> >
>> > The core idea is that an Action type defines a handful of re-usable
>> > properties that apply to actions, but that we can clarify and extend
>> > these for specific action types. This allows us to use more
>> > domain-specific language with detailed action types. At a schema level
>> > we can often view these subtype-specific properties as specializations
>> > or sub-properties of the more general Action properties. This approach
>> > balances a desire for human-friendly descriptive language with the
>> > goal of generic and extensible processing of action/activity data.
>> > Future improvements to the schema.org site should make these
>> > sub-property relationships more accessible to both humans and
>> > machines; for now they are indicated via textual descriptions.
>> >
>> > The general 'Action' properties are: agent, instrument, location,
>> > object, participant, result, startTime, endTime. For example, a
>> > specific Action subtype such as
>> > http://sdo-actions.appspot.com/FollowAction might introduce a property
>> > such as http://sdo-actions.appspot.com/followee that we can declare to
>> > be a sub-property of the more general
>> > http://sdo-actions.appspot.com/object. So in this case, we can define
>> > 'followee' ("A sub property of object. The person or organization
>> > being followed.") in terms of 'object', i.e. "The object upon the
>> > action is carried out, whose state is kept intact or changed. Also
>> > known as the semantic roles patient, affected or undergoer (which
>> > change their state) or theme (which doesn't). e.g. John read *a
>> > book*".
>> >
>> >
>> > Schema.org Actions have been designed to integrate fully with the
>> > broader schema.org approach, i.e. it is syntax-agnostic (RDFa,
>> > Microdata, JSON-LD etc.), and draws upon schema.org's existing
>> > vocabulary (large collection of nouns and their properties) and
>> > machinery (type and property hierarchies). The intent is to launch
>> > with a useful package of types that draw upon community experience
>> > (including activity streams) and industry trends. The use of hierarchy
>> > to organize these types aims at providing attachment points that allow
>> > both vocabulary-reuse and independent extensions. Discussion of the
>> > detail and structure of these types is particularly welcome; ideally
>> > via public-vocabs@w3.org, or the W3C WebSchemas Wiki. I can relay
>> > non-public comments to the schema.org team if anyone prefers to do so.
>> > Sam Goto (goto@google.com), one of the co-authors of this work, has
>> > also volunteered to do this next week as I'll be taking some vacation
>> > time; please copy us both to be sure.
>> >
>> >
>> > The schema.org team is keen to move forward with this work, and to
>> > adopt a basic Action type hierarchy that can be subsequently extended
>> > for future/possible actions, handlers etc. We will take a look next
>> > Thursday on discussions so far, and decide whether we have rough
>> > consensus that this work is ready. As you know we can always tweak,
>> > improve and edit published schemas, but any comments on these
>> > near-final efforts would be much appreciated prior to their inclusion
>> > in schema.org.
>> >
>> >
>> > Having said all this, we still have a few final additions and modest
>> > tweaks to make over the coming week to integrate some more action use
>> > cases (e.g. see http://help.yandex.com/webmaster/?id=1127989), but
>> > nothing that should alter substantively what you see. We'll keep you
>> > posted as that evolves, and we expect this thing to continue evolving
>> > incrementally after that. If you read this far, thanks for your
>> > patience and any thoughts you can share on this work.
>> >
>> >
>> > cheers,
>> >
>> >
>> > Dan (for the schema.org team)
>> >
>> >
>> > See http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/ActivityActions for earlier
>> > drafts:
>> > * [April2012]
>> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2012Apr/0030.html
>> > * [Nov2012]
>> > http://www.w3.org/wiki/images/7/79/Schema.orgActionsMinimaldraft.pdf
>> > * [May2013]
>> > http://www.w3.org/wiki/images/3/38/ActionsinSchema.org2013-05-11.pdf
>> > * [June2013]
>> > http://www.w3.org/wiki/images/6/6a/Actions_in_Schema.org_-_Draft_3.pdf
>> >
>>
>
Received on Friday, 26 July 2013 21:35:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:28 UTC