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

Re: CreativeWork can't be a Product?

From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 16:01:17 +0200
Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
Message-Id: <A88B6FC2-B728-47BE-9B5D-4C91C45666D0@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: kcoyle@kcoyle.net
On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:54 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:

> Martin, that wasn't a criticism.
I did not take it as such ;-)

> I really do mean that the lack of properties had led me to think of additionalType as significantly different to multiple schema types. Since schema uses a single namespace, it makes sense to me that additionalType would allow references to non-schema types, while one would use multiple schema types in a type declaration.
> So, have we concluded that additionalType refers to classes external to schema?
Yes, since for additional classes from the same vocabulary, one can use the native mechanisms for multiple classes in both RDFa and Microdata.

We should stress, though, that there is formally no difference between additionalType and the primary type, except for in Microdata syntax, where the type in itemtype determines the properties that can be used. It may also be that clients can understand a type only when it is the main type.


martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp 
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2013 14:01:52 UTC

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