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: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 00:01:44 -0500
Message-ID: <5269FB38.8020407@mkbergman.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
CC: public-vocabs@w3.org
Sure, if schema.org's ultimate purpose is to promote data understanding 
and interoperability -- as opposed to a crowdsourced mechanism for the 
major search engines to get entity attributes -- then I agree totally 
the question of data model becomes essential. As the earlier SKOS 
discussions nibbled at, my own preference (in this instance) is RDFS.

Mike

On 10/24/2013 11:42 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> Agreed, with the caveat that my message isn't at all about the details of the types and their properties and their ranges at schema.org (which I find rather lacking, by the way, but it should be possible to overcome these problems with some fancy footwork) but is instead about how and what data model underlies schema.org and what constitutes unexceptional data sources according to schema.org.
>
> peter
>
> On Oct 24, 2013, at 9:02 PM, Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

-- 
__________________________________________

Michael K. Bergman
CEO  Structured Dynamics LLC
319.621.5225
skype:michaelkbergman
http://structureddynamics.com
http://mkbergman.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mkbergman
__________________________________________
Received on Friday, 25 October 2013 05:02:17 UTC

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