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

Re: schema.org as reconstructed from the human-readable information at schema.org

From: Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 23:02:36 -0500
Message-ID: <5269ED5C.2000409@mkbergman.com>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
This thread, and the SKOS one before it, are fascinating exchanges with 
insightful analysis of the tension between a simple, largely 
unstructured, bottom-up schema, with the emergence of interest in more 
structured frameworks that can provide coherence and linkages into other 
actionable knowledge structures.

Is schema.org meant to be simply a deck of useful key-value 
specifications a la Wikipedia infoboxes or microformats? Or, is it meant 
to be a basis for more useful work down the line?

If the latter, I think there is much to be re-evaluated here going 
forward. This observation applies both to schema.org's mapping 
vocabulary as well as to its internal structure and consistency.

Thanks, Mike

On 10/24/2013 10:26 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> The purpose of this exercise was mostly curiosity in the end, at least after I discovered all the strangenesses, but certainly started with desire to use schema.org information for real.
>
> peter
>
> On Oct 24, 2013, at 6:31 PM, Guha <guha@google.com> wrote:
>
>> Mostly right. See below for corrections. What is the purpose of this 'reconstruction', if I may ask?
>>
>> guha
>
>
Received on Friday, 25 October 2013 04:03:07 UTC

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