- From: Francois-Paul Servant <francoispaulservant@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 09:40:09 +0200
- To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- Cc: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Hi Martin, and all Le 26 juil. 2013 à 10:04, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> a écrit : > Hi all, > for the automotive segment, I strongly recommend integrating > > http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/vso/ns > > into schema.org. > > It is a GoodRelations extension for all kinds of vehicles and will thus nicely fit to the already existing GoodRelations elements in schema.org. > > Exposing configuration information can basically be done in two ways: > > 1. Exposing the *rules* for compatibility of components; that is what Volkswagen does with their COO ontology, > > http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/vocabularies/coo/ns.html > > 2. Exposing (a subset of) actually buildable cars or partly configured cars; this is what can be done with basic schema.org/GoodRelations/VSO elements, plus maybe the conceptual modeling work done at Renault. > > For Web markup, I recommend the second route, but it will not require more than just translating the VSO ontology into a schema.org extension proposal, and I will tackle that as soon as my resources permit. I am curious to know how you would do that. VSO recommends to make statements such as: foo:myCar vso:fuelType dbpedia:Diesel. How can you adapt that to handle configurations? For configurations, you have to be able to state, for instance, that the fuelType may be diesel or gasoline, but not electric. I don't see how you can do that using the vso:fuelType property Best, fps
Received on Sunday, 28 July 2013 20:06:55 UTC