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

Re: CreativeWork can't be a Product?

From: Guha <guha@google.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 16:59:46 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPAGhv_POkEwMHx3g3w6RB8tvsycgg3is2BceWXhSZMVxbNipA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com>
Cc: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, Chilly Bang <chilly_bang@yahoo.de>, Public Vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
This is what  http://schema.org/additionalType is for.

All of an object's types have the same standing.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is this what http://schema.org/additionalType is for?
> --
> Wes Turner
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dan's solution and Martin's link are excellent ones.  Just a quick FYI a
>> previous discussion and a proposal related to it provide some further
>> information on this type of conundrum in schema.org:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/2013Jan/0182.html
>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SchemaDotOrgMetaSchema
>> A fragment from the former reference:
>> > Assuming they take OWL seriously, they would infer new types for the
>> > entity if properties were mixed and matched. If example, if the claimed
>> > type is schema:Book and somebody used the schema:sku property, they
>> > could infer it is also a schema:Product.
>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:16:01PM +0100, Chilly Bang wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>> i'm busy at the moment with marking up with microdata of an online
>>>> bookstore and realized the following dilemma:
>>>> if a page is about describing and selling of a CreativeWork/Book, so i
>>>> come to selling properties with itemprop="offers" itemscope="" itemtype="
>>>> http://schema.org/**Offer <http://schema.org/Offer>". But on this way
>>>> i can't describe the book i sell like Product, with product's properties -
>>>> i can't find any passage from CreativeWork to Product. There is in fact a
>>>> passage from Offer to Product, with itemprop="itemOffered" itemscope=""
>>>> itemtype="http://schema.org/**Product <http://schema.org/Product>",
>>>> but repeating isn't a good way, beside of this it isn't easy to get such
>>>> passage into html, even with itemref.
>>>> I see no possibility to go the way CreativeWork->Product->Offer (or
>>>> CreativeWork->Product and CreativeWork->Offer), but only
>>>> CreativeWork->Offer, or Product->Offer. CreativeWork can't be a Product or
>>>> am i wrong?
>>>> Imho CreativeWork surely can own product's properties so it must gladly
>>>> have a passage from any CreativeWork property to Product.
>>> You can just use both types in the itemtype declaration, for example,
>>> itemtype="Book Product".
>>> We're doing this in the #schemabibex group to express offers for a given
>>> item. And Martin gave a wonderful example of this approach on this list
>>> just a few days back at
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-vocabs/2013Sep/**0206.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Sep/0206.html>
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2013 00:00:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:32 UTC