- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 15:42:03 +0100
- To: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
- Cc: jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com>, Guha <guha@google.com>, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, PublicVocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 9 October 2013 15:31, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote: >> Merely saying that a property expects an URL doesn't really cut it, >> since most non-literal-valued properties can usefully take URLs... > > Can you (briefly) describe how it doesn't "cut it" to allow something > like schema:occupationalCategory to point at a resource using a URL? In a weak sense it does cut it, in just the same sense that we could say that in http://schema.org/Movie the http://schema.org/trailer property expects an http://schema.org/URL instead of http://schema.org/VideoObject. Or http://schema.org/ImageObject has http://schema.org/thumbnail which expects value to be http://schema.org/ImageObject ... ... in many many cases URLs can be used, ... but sometimes the thing we point to can also be usefully described inline too, with further properties and relationships. 'URL' is very very vague and doesn't address the inline description possibility. We'd like to be able to say that the value of occupationalCategory can be (Enum)Concept, just as we say that the value of thumbnail is ImageObject. Specific instance data might use a remote link, or might include an inline description using those types. Dan
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 14:42:34 UTC