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

Re: Semantically marking up a "checklist" or process

From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 10:19:15 +0200
Cc: kcoyle@kcoyle.net, Public Vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F28B742C-5165-4D25-B6C5-8E3AD916539B@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
This should be catered by version 2 of my proposal.
And it again points to the fact that the order is bound to a context, since the same author had likely very different positions in different author lists.
Martin

On Sep 11, 2013, at 1:36 AM, Aaron Bradley wrote:

> Karen's example also brings recipes to mind, where ingredients are typically listed in the order required by the preparation of the dish.  The recipe author may not be highly insulted when order is not retained, but individual cooks may end up highly annoyed. :)
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
> To give another use case that might not be appropriate to ListItem:
> 
> In some fields in academic publishing the order of the authors on a journal article has strict meaning, and is essential to the accrued status of the various authors. Members of that community are highly insulted when order is not retained.
> 
> In fact, the bibliographic ontology BIBO presents "author" as an ordered list at all times, even when there is only one author.
> 
>  <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="authorList">
>         <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">list of authors</rdfs:label>
>         <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:datatype="&xsd;anyURI"
>             >http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/</rdfs:isDefinedBy>
>         <ns:term_status>stable</ns:term_status>
>         <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en"
>             >An ordered list of authors. Normally, this list is seen as a priority list that order authors by importance.</rdfs:comment>
>         <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="Document"/>
>         <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="contributorList"/>
>         <rdfs:range>
>             <owl:Class>
>                 <owl:unionOf rdf:parseType="Collection">
>                     <rdf:Description rdf:about="&rdf;List"/>
>                     <rdf:Description rdf:about="&rdf;Seq"/>
>                 </owl:unionOf>
>             </owl:Class>
>         </rdfs:range>
>     </owl:ObjectProperty>
> 
> kc
> 
> 
> On 9/10/13 3:28 PM, Jarno van Driel wrote:
> What I tried to portray is more a thought than an exact proposition. My
> point with it is that IMHO it would better to have an 'order' mechanism
> within schema.org/Thing <http://schema.org/Thing> than having it only
> applied to a schema.org/ListItem <http://schema.org/ListItem>. Mainly
> 
> because I think a mechanism to create order can be applicable in many
> more situations besides a schema.org/ItemList
> <http://schema.org/ItemList> and was wondering if others agree with this
> 
> line of thought
> 
> Now as for the exact way how we can accomplish this, I'm sure there are
> plenty of folks here who know a lot more on how to accomplish something
> like this than I do. So by all means correct me where I'm wrong.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com
> <mailto:jasondouglas@google.com>> wrote:
> 
>     I'm not following why adding "next" and "prev" to Thing is better
>     than adding "position"?  They both seem equally
>     problematic semantically, yet the former offers less convenience
>     than the latter... and also interferes with the recommended use of
>     itemid as a canonical URL.
> 
> 
>     On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Jarno van Driel
>     <jarno@quantumspork.nl <mailto:jarno@quantumspork.nl>> wrote:
> 
>         Now maybe I'm a bit naive but I can't help thinking about the
>         mechanism that exist in HTML to create order, namely rel="next"
>         and rel="prev".
> 
>         Could we maybe do something with mark up like this:
> 
>         <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ItemList">
>            <h2 itemprop="name">Most popular products</h2>
> 
>            <ol>
>              <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemid="product-1" itemscope
>         itemtype="http://schema.org/Product">
>                <link itemprop="next" href="product-2">
> 
>                <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>                  <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>                </a>
>              </li>
> 
>              <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemid="product-2" itemscope
>         itemtype="http://schema.org/Product">
>                <link itemprop="prev" href="product-1">
>                <link itemprop="next" href="product-3">
> 
>                <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>                  <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>                </a>
>              </li>
> 
>              <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemid="product-2" itemscope
>         itemtype="http://schema.org/Product">
>                <link itemprop="prev" href="product-2">
> 
>                <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>                  <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>                </a>
>              </li>
>            </ol>
>         </div>
> 
>         Here we have a <link> element and 2 new properties for 'Thing'
>         (Product): 'next' & 'prev' (or whichever labels would be more
>         preferable) which by means of the href could be linked to the
>         corresponding 'itemid'.
> 
>         Would thist be a viable line of thought?
> 
> 
>         On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Jarno van Driel
>         <jarno@quantumspork.nl <mailto:jarno@quantumspork.nl>> wrote:
> 
>             I have spend some time reading the sources provided by
>             Martin and after thinking his proposition through I come the
>             to the conclusion his proposition just isn't quite there
>             yet, since the creation of the new type 'ListItem' still
>             doesn't fix the issue that Things can't be linked to
>             itemListElements.
> 
>             To compensate this Martin suggests that, with the addition
>             of the 'ListItem' type, declaration of an additionalType
>             could resolve this. Now correct if I'm wrong here, but isn't
>             the 'additionalType' property typically used to declare a
>             (more specific) type from a different vocabulary instead of
>             declaring a second schema.org <http://schema.org> type?
> 
> 
>             Next to that, If I interpretate his proposition correctly
>             and make an HTML example, I come to something like this:
>             (sorry for doing it in Microdata, I'm not to comfortable
>             with RDFa still)
> 
>             <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ItemList">
>                <h2 itemprop="name">Most popular products</h2>
> 
>                <ol>
>                  <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemscope
>             itemtype="http://schema.org/ListItem"
>             additionalType="http://schema.org/Product">
>                    <meta itemprop="itemPostion" content="1">
> 
>                    <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>                      <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>                    </a>
>                  </li>
> 
>                  <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemscope
>             itemtype="http://schema.org/ListItem"
>             additionalType="http://schema.org/Product">
>                    <meta itemprop="itemPostion" content="2">
> 
>                    <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>                      <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>                    </a>
>                  </li>
> 
>                  <!-- etc, etc -->
>                </ol>
>             </div>
> 
>             Doing it this way would falsely give the 'Product' the
>             'itemPosition' property as well, entering a whole new area
>             of problems.
> 
>             Now Martin also said: "... whether the expected range for
>             itemListElement could be broadened to schema:Thing. From the
>             top of my head, I would oppose that, for the simple reason
>             that the property itemPosition would then have to be added
>             to Thing, which is confusing."
> 
>             Here I have to agree that adding 'itemPosition' to 'Thing'
>             would be confusing indeed but maybe we should keep thinking
>             in this direction nonetheless. Apparently we're missing a
>             proper way to add 'order' to schema.org <http://schema.org>.
> 
>             This doesn't only count for an ItemList but for example also
>             faults in being able to declare the order of a series of
>             WebPages (book) or images (IKEA manual), etc.
> 
>             If we can come up with a proper manner to declare the order
>             of Things, this could be very applicable in a lot other
>             situations as well. And in case of an itemListElement it
>             would make it possible to have it's range contain a Thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>             On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Martin Hepp
>             <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>             <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote:
> 
>                 So in short, if it is okay for you to collate the entity
>                 and the list item for the entity, we can simply work
>                 with a multi-typed HTML element and save one additional
>                 property. If you want to be able to model the entity
>                 independently of the list item and have a formal link
>                 between both, we need an additional property. But then
>                 this should maybe be a generic property for linking
>                 entities and their representation (maybe from the
>                 library extension, did not check), and we are also in
>                 the middle of philosophical distinctions that are, while
>                 valuable, difficult to teach to broad audiences ;-)
> 
>                 I am for simply collating them and using a single
>                 multi-typed entity.
> 
>                 Martin
> 
>                 On Sep 10, 2013, at 4:48 PM, Justin Boyan wrote:
> 
>                  > Martin,
>                  >
>                  > Wouldn't the ListItem also need a second property,
>                 call it "item", with a range of Thing? Otherwise how
>                 would we mark up a list of Restaurants, a list of
>                 Universities, etc.?
>                  >
>                  > Justin
>                  >
>                  >
>                  > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Martin Hepp
>                 <mfhepp@gmail.com <mailto:mfhepp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>                  > Hi Dan, Guha:
>                  >
>                  > Attached, please find the proposal in the RDFa format
>                 necessary for inclusion in schema.org <http://schema.org>.
> 
>                  >
>                  > Martin
>                  >
>                  >
>                  >
>                  >
>                  >
>                  > <!-- ========================== -->
>                  > <!-- CHANGES TO EXISTING ELEMENTS -->
>                  > <!-- ========================== -->
>                  >
>                  > <!-- New range
>                  > <div typeof="rdf:Property"
>                 about="http://schema.org/itemListElement">
>                  >         <span>Domain: <a
>                 property="http://schema.org/domain"
>                 href="http://schema.org/ItemList">ItemList</a></span>
>                  >         <span>Range: <a
>                 property="http://schema.org/range"
>                 href="http://schema.org/ListItem">ListItem</a></span>
>                  >         <span>Range: <a
>                 property="http://schema.org/range"
>                 href="http://schema.org/Text">Text</a></span>
>                  >         ItemList
>                  > </div>
>                  >
>                  > <!-- ========================== -->
>                  > <!-- ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS -->
>                  > <!-- ========================== -->
>                  >
>                  > <div typeof="rdfs:Class"
>                 about="http://schema.org/ListItem">
>                  >         <span class="h"
>                 property="rdfs:label">ListItem</span>
>                  >         <span property="rdfs:comment">An list item,
>                 e.g. a step in a checklist or how-to description.</span>
>                  >         <span>Subclass of: <a
>                 property="rdfs:subClassOf"
>                 href="http://schema.org/StructuredValue">StructuredValue</a></span>
>                  > </div>
>                  >
>                  > <div typeof="rdf:Property"
>                 about="http://schema.org/itemPosition">
>                  >         <span class="h"
>                 property="rdfs:label">itemPosition</span>
>                  >         <span property="rdfs:comment">The position of
>                 the item in an ordered list (1 = first, 2 = second,
>                 ...).</span>
>                  >         <span>Domain: <a
>                 property="http://schema.org/domain"
>                 href="http://schema.org/ListItem">ListItem</a></span>
>                  >         <span>Range: <a
>                 property="http://schema.org/range"
>                 href="http://schema.org/Number">Number</a></span>
>                  > </div>
>                  >
>                  >
>                  > On Sep 10, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Martin Hepp wrote:
>                  >
>                  > > Hi Jarno:
>                  > >
>                  > >>> Now if the expected value of an itemListElement
>                 could also be a Thing, wouldn't both the order (of the
>                 output array) and the Things it's about be preserved?
>                  > >
>                  > > In fact, that includes the interesting question
>                 whether the expected range for itemListElement could be
>                 broadened to schema:Thing.
>                  > > From the top of my head, I would oppose that, for
>                 the simple reason that the property itemPosition would
>                 then have to be added to Thing, which is confusing.
>                  > > Second, if you want to type the ListItem further,
>                 you could simply use a secondary type via basic RDFa
>                 patterns or the additionalType property.
>                  > >
>                  > > As for the order:
>                  > > Implicitly, the order of the elements from the HTML
>                 tree would be accessible. But at least in RDFa syntax
>                 that is not preserved when the data is extracted.
>                  > > Also, it is possible that the ordering in the list
>                 differs from the intended conceptual ordering.
>                  > >
>                  > > So again, I think that with as little as one new
>                 type, one range change, and one additional property we
>                 could get this issue done.
>                  > >
>                  > > Martin
>                  > >
>                  > >
>                  > > On Sep 10, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Jarno van Driel wrote:
>                  > >
>                  > >> Correction: I should have mentioned:
>                 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Jun/0042.html
>                 The other example contain formatting errors.
>                  > >>
>                  > >>
>                  > >> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Jarno van Driel
>                 <jarno@quantumspork.nl <mailto:jarno@quantumspork.nl>>
> 
>                 wrote:
>                  > >>>
>                  > >>> One of the problems I tried to raise/get answered
>                 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Jun/0043.html)
>                 about thehttp://schema.org/ItemList
>                 <http://schema.org/ItemList> itemListElement property is
>                 that it's expected value is text. So if you mark up a
>                 top10 list of Things you loose the linkage between the
>                 ItemList and the Things it's about.
>                  > >>>
>                  > >>>
>                  > >>> Now if the expected value of an itemListElement
>                 could also be a Thing, wouldn't both the order (of the
>                 output array) and the Things it's about be preserved?
>                  > >>>
>                  > >>>
>                  > >>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Justin Boyan
>                 <jaboyan@google.com <mailto:jaboyan@google.com>> wrote:
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>> I support Martin's suggestion. This would also
>                 better model the common structure of "top 10 lists",
>                 such as these:
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>>
>                 http://www.zagat.com/l/boston/great-restaurants-for-ribs-in-boston
>                  > >>>>
>                 http://blogs.sfweekly.com/foodie/2012/01/san_franciscos_top_10_burritos.php
>                  > >>>>
>                 http://guestofaguest.com/new-york/nightlife/downtown-nyc-happy-hour-10-bars-to-check-out-after-work-today
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>> Note that in the last 2 of these 3 cases, the
>                 list is separated over multiple web pages, which makes
>                 it crucial to model the position number explicitly
>                 rather than trying to infer it from the container.
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>> I think ListItem should not be a subtype of
>                 WebPageElement - that's just confounding two things and
>                 adding a bunch of needless subproperties. It can live
>                 under schema.org/StructuredValue
>                 <http://schema.org/StructuredValue> with other similar
> 
>                 types.
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>> I would suggest that itemPosition be 1-based,
>                 rather than 0-based, since that is by far the
>                 predominant usage for all the use cases discussed above.
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>> Justin
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >>>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Martin Hepp
>                 <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote:
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> Hi Amit,
>                  > >>>>> If the goal is to merely capture the elements
>                 of a checklist as a list structure, then
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> http://schema.org/ItemList
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> should IMO provide all that is needed.
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> In RDFa or other RDF syntaxes, this of course
>                 means loosing the order of the items, as Vicki Tardif
>                 already pointed out.
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> A simple solution would be to
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> 1. define a type ListItem with an additional
>                 property
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> itemPosition Number The position of the item in
>                 an ordered list 0 = first, 1 = second, ...
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> We could also reuse
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#displayPosition
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> for that; it serves a similar purpose.
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> 2. expand the range of the itemListElement from
>                 Text to Text or ListItem
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> That should do the trick. At least I guess you
>                 could immediately mark up all of the example pages you
>                 listed.
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> By the way, we should discuss whether ItemList
>                 should rather become a subtype of
>                 http://schema.org/WebPageElement, since we have Table
>                 there, so we may also want to have List there. A counter
>                 argument is that while Table is a significant Web page
>                 element type, List is a more generic data structure and
>                 not constrained to Web pages. (But then again, some
>                 tables outside of HTML markup, e.g. in JSON-LD or CSV,
>                 are also not WebPageElements in the strict sense).
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> Martin
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> On Sep 9, 2013, at 5:44 PM, TallyFy wrote:
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>>> Some examples  ...
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>> Web:
>                  > >>>>>>
>                 http://www.realsimple.com/home-organizing/cleaning/fall-cleaning-checklist-00000000000928/index.html
>                  > >>>>>> http://www.wikihow.com/Main-Page
>                  > >>>>>>
>                 http://www.realsimple.com/weddings/dress-attire/wedding-gown-shopping-checklist-00000000000200/index.html
>                  > >>>>>> http://terrymorris.net/bestpractices/
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>> Gov:
>                  > >>>>>> https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-checklist
>                  > >>>>>>
>                 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hurricane-supply-checklist
>                 (in a pdf)
>                  > >>>>>> http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/ncp/repository (a
>                 simpler version would be great!)
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>> Health:
>                  > >>>>>>
>                 http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Healthyhearts/Pages/Arrhythmiachecklist.aspx
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>> I proposed this initiative just to wrap steps
>                 in a checklist. The capture of content from each step or
>                 conditional stuff is out of range and is a user
>                 interaction. There's many examples in the book "The
>                 Checklist Manifesto" by Dr. Atul Gawande:
>                  > >>>>>> http://gawande.com/the-checklist-manifesto
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>> When Tallyfy launches in a few months, we will
>                 have some too.
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>> thanks
>                  > >>>>>> Amit
>                  > >>>>>> On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 15:39, Martin
>                 Hepp wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>> Hi Jason:
>                  > >>>>>>>> Process modeling is a rat hole and way out
>                 of scope, IMO
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>> I fully agree ;-)
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>> But even if you decide to add a very simple
>                 mechanism for exposing structured "step-by-step" info, I
>                 think that both
>                  > >>>>>>> a) explicit control flows (step x follows
>                 step x) and
>                  > >>>>>>> b( patterns for declarative approaches should
>                 be added (like "dependsOn" and "consequence" or"nextStep").
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>> Is the proposal under discussion here driven
>                 by actual use cases? If such, it would be good to have a
>                 couple of sites at hand that currently expose such
>                 checklist or process information.
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>> Martin
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>> On Sep 9, 2013, at 4:33 PM, Jason Douglas wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>> Yipes. I thought this thread was just about
>                 understanding "howto" content pages in a structured way.
>                 Process modeling is a rat hole and way out of scope, IMO.
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 4:17 AM, Martin Hepp
>                 <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>> On Sep 9, 2013, at 1:00 PM, Tallyfy wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>> Are Wil and Jan members of this list?
>                  > >>>>>>>> I don't know, but I don't think so.
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>> Without prejudice to some work here that
>                 may result in a simple and web-friendly spec, I think
>                 some organisation to reach the goal of defining explicit
>                 control flow would be highly rewarding - since it would
>                 represent a necessary evolution beyond
>                 machine-understandable markup and entities. How entities
>                 are a constituent of higher level goals and processes is
>                 probably the real answer to better search. If not
>                 search, they would be a very interesting in terms of
>                 knowledge discovery - such as being to ask 'What happens
>                 at the Chile embassy [location]?' in Sam's example, to
>                 use just one permutation of many possible questions.
>                 Bringing all this to a scale such as the web would be
>                 very exciting.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>> We at Tallyfy can help to define and
>                 implement Process markup, but we are one of many others.
>                 Is there a way that a project with some organisation can
>                 be spawned from this discussion?
>                  > >>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>                  > >>>>>>>>> Amit
>                  > >>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>> On 9 Sep 2013, at 11:33, Martin Hepp
>                 <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> All:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> If you really want to embark into process
>                 modeling in schema.org <http://schema.org>, then you
> 
>                 should first become clear about
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> - whether you want to model processes in
>                 procedural fashion (explicit control flow) or a
>                 declarative fashion (modeling a set of actions and their
>                 pre- and post-conditions), and
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> - whether the process models should be
>                 executable by a computer or merely documents for human
>                 consumption.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> Hundreds of researchers have worked on
>                 understanding how processes can be modeled in the
>                 context of information systems, and the least one can
>                 say is that
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> 1. it is hard and
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> 2. quick, simple approaches don't work or
>                 don't scale or both.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> See e.g.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                 http://www2.informatik.hu-berlin.de/top/download/publications/fahlandlmrwwz_2009_emmsad.pdf
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> for a brief overview.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> Without excluding others, I think it would
>                 make a lot of sense to involve
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> Wil van der Aalst,
>                 http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/~wvdaalst/
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> and
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> Jan Mendling,
>                 http://www.wu.ac.at/infobiz/team/mendling
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> in any such draft. They both spent years
>                 of their lives into understanding the challenges of
>                 process modeling...
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> Martin
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 6, 2013, at 10:04 PM, Vicki Tardif
>                 Holland wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> I think a combination of Jason's
>                 suggestion of http://schema.org/ItemList and something
>                 similar to http://schema.org/Recipe would do the trick.
>                 The key difference is that you probably want to specify
>                 the step number instead of relying on page layout as
>                 parsers often discard the order of elements.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> Vicki
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> Vicki Tardif Holland | Metadata Analyst |
>                 vtardif@google.com <mailto:vtardif@google.com> |
>                 978-613-9630 <tel:978-613-9630>
> 
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Tallyfy
>                 <hello@tallyfy.com <mailto:hello@tallyfy.com>> wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> "Process" sounds very promising as a
>                 purely top-level construct, because any serial process
>                 (not related to a "thing" but maybe with embedded
>                 references to things) can be wrapped and labelled as an
>                 actionable container. http://schema.org/Recipe is the
>                 same concept as this, but only relates to food recipes.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> We subscribe the Gates quote - "the
>                 future of search is verbs" and interpret it as machines
>                 able to understand not just content, but processes like
>                 "How to get a Chile tourist visa for British citizens" -
>                 an ordered list of steps. Rankings for processes are
>                 also different to content backlinks, which we are
>                 working on, as you could define pre-requisites (do this
>                 before doing this) and chain processes after (after
>                 doing this - continue with this).
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> Could somebody help me propose this as a
>                 new item? I have no idea where to start.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> thanks
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> Amit
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> http://tallyfy.com
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, 5 September 2013 at 17:36,
>                 Sam Goto wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe an ItemList (or a specialized
>                 subclass, e.g. http://schema.org/Process) of
>                 http://schema.org/Action and its subclasses?
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Tallyfy
>                 <hello@tallyfy.com <mailto:hello@tallyfy.com>> wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The list may not be about a specific
>                 thing, but a process - which could include many things.
>                 For example - the list, "How to enjoy a great Saturday
>                 night in" might have a reference to a food - pizza AND a
>                 movie - as an entity, etc. Granted, the example isn't
>                 the best, but it's entirely unrelated to any specific thing.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>> In the composite scenario (which might
>                 not even have any linked entities) - I guess there might
>                 not even be a thing here at all, it's quite specifically
>                 a set of steps with an objective. For example "What to
>                 look out for when buying a house in London"
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>> So to clarify, this isn't to enumerate
>                 objects or things into a determined order like "Top 10"
>                 - it's to define actionable things as steps - whether or
>                 not there's related entities.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>> A
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, 5 September 2013 at 17:24,
>                 Jason Douglas wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe a new subclass of ItemList?
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aside: seems like ItemListElement
>                 should have a range of Thing so you could do structured
>                 lists (movies, steps, etc.).
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -jason
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:44 AM,
>                 Tallyfy <hello@tallyfy.com <mailto:hello@tallyfy.com>>
> 
>                 wrote:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I run a startup called http://tallyfy.com
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We've just been enrolled into
>                 StartupChile, and aim to launch within a few months
>                 using their help. Our homepage looks something like this:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14563542/tallyfy.png
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What we do is allow anyone to embed
>                 knowledge as steps in a checklist or a process. Examples
>                 might be:
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  How to bake a carrot cake
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  How to change a bicycle tyre
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  What to pack if you're visiting the
>                 Amazon rainforest
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  My bucket list
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The clearest and most obvious point
>                 to make here is that these checklists, when marked up
>                 via schema.org <http://schema.org> would be excellent
> 
>                 ways to present answers to questions without people
>                 going through many pages on search engines.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I wanted to propose a schema for
>                 marking up a checklist (or a process).. If there is one
>                 already - could someone point me to it?
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we could understand that this is a
>                 "set of steps for doing something" - I think that would
>                 be very valuable, not just to search but for people
>                 looking for knowledge which is actionable, not just web
>                 pages. In other words, an actual set of steps marked up
>                 is more valuable than a block of content (usually using
>                 <ol> or <ul> HTML) which blends into a web page.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We intend to do a lot more - you can
>                 measure how many people did a checklist, how long it
>                 took on average, reviews, etc. so perhaps those could
>                 incorporate into this schema.
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Amit
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                 --------------------------------------------------------
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> martin hepp
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> e-business & web science research group
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>                  > >>>>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
> 
>                  > >>>>>>>>>> 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/
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                 --------------------------------------------------------
>                  > >>>>>>>> martin hepp
>                  > >>>>>>>> e-business & web science research group
>                  > >>>>>>>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>                  > >>>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>> e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>                  > >>>>>>>> phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>                  > >>>>>>>> fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
> 
>                  > >>>>>>>> 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/
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                 --------------------------------------------------------
>                  > >>>>>>> martin hepp
>                  > >>>>>>> e-business & web science research group
>                  > >>>>>>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>                  > >>>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>>> e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>                  > >>>>>>> phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>                  > >>>>>>> fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
> 
>                  > >>>>>>> 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/
>                  > >>>>>>
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>>
>                 --------------------------------------------------------
>                  > >>>>> martin hepp
>                  > >>>>> e-business & web science research group
>                  > >>>>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>> e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>                  > >>>>> phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>                  > >>>>> fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
> 
>                  > >>>>> 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/
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>>
>                  > >>>>
>                  > >
>                  > >
>                 --------------------------------------------------------
>                  > > martin hepp
>                  > > e-business & web science research group
>                  > > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>                  > >
>                  > > e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>                  > > phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>                  > > fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620
>                 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
> 
>                  > > 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/
>                  > >
>                  > >
>                  > >
>                  >
>                  >
>                  >
> 
> 
> 
>                 --------------------------------------------------------
>                 martin hepp
>                 e-business & web science research group
>                 universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
> 
>                 e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
>                 <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>                 phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>                 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
> 
>                 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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> ph: 1-510-540-7596
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------
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 Wednesday, 11 September 2013 08:19:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:31 UTC