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

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

From: Sam Goto <goto@google.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:33:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMtUnc7TsngAB88jddihMbNQ3cvtGyoEaUydVFLx=yA2z44dfw@mail.gmail.com>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Chris Messina <messina@google.com>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
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 Sunday, 28 July 2013 20:06:56 UTC

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