Re: Semantically marking up a "checklist" or process

On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Martin Hepp <
martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> as for the discussion on whether we should use chaining (prev / next
> links) or simple integer numbers for representing order, I have a firm
> preference for the latter (i.e. a property itemPosition rather than prev /
> next links). In fact, in GoodRelations, we introduced the latter e.g. for
> ordering days of the week because the first approach did not work too well.
>
> This is for the following reasons:
>
> 1. Chaining works well only with "perfect" data - consistent and complete.
> If you miss one element (e.g. due to invalid markup etc.), you are lost.
> Data on the Web is typically noisy and buggy, so the conceptual beauty of
> chains comes at the cost of unreliability.
>
> 2. Chaining blows up the markup - you typically have two properties per
> each entity (one to the previous, one to the next).
>
> 3. Most importantly: For consumers of the data, it is much easier to sort
> items by a single literal than to reconstruct the ordered list from the
> chain structure. That was the reasons why the days of the week in
> GoodRelations now have an integer value indicating their position.
>
> As for the question on representing the order of entities that form the
> list: This must, IMO, be solved with a dedicated data structure, since the
> position in the list is always a property of the entity solely in the
> context of that list and not a globally valid property of the entity. Think
> of a list of favorite actors or songs - the same items can be ordered
> completely different on different sites.
>
> So I revisit my proposal and suggest to add a property
>
>         represents Thing The entity represented by the entry in the list
> (e.g. the artist, song, ...).
>

We still need to support text entries in numbered lists -- which property
would be used for that (ListItem.name, ListItem.description,
ListItem.represents, ... )?  Otherwise, this looks about right to me.


> The you can define the actual entity inside the list entry and link to it
> from the list element.
>
> The full proposal is attached.
>
> This should cater for all use-cases discussed so far.
>
> 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>
>
> <div typeof="rdf:Property" about="http://schema.org/represents">
>         <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">represents</span>
>         <span property="rdfs:comment">The entity represented by the entry
> in the list (e.g. the artist, song, ...).</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/Thing">Thing</a></span>
> </div>
>
>
>
> On Sep 11, 2013, at 1:54 AM, Jason Douglas wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl>
> 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 than having it only applied to a
> schema.org/ListItem. Mainly because I think a mechanism to create order
> can be applicable in many more situations besides a schema.org/ItemListand was wondering if others agree with this line of thought
> >
> > Chaining might be sufficient for these procedural use cases, but it
> doesn't seem sufficient as a universal schema.org list mechanism... track
> numbers on a CD, for example, can have gaps in the numerical sequence.  Or
> numbered lists might not start at 1 (or 0 ;-).
> >
> > ... or representing a tie, which in numbered lists is often done as: 1,
> 2, 2, 4, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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>
> 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>
> 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>
> 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 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. 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> 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> wrote:
> > > Hi Dan, Guha:
> > >
> > > Attached, please find the proposal in the RDFa format necessary for
> inclusion in 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> 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 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>
> 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 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> 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> 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> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> All:
> > > >>>>>>>>>> If you really want to embark into process modeling in
> 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 | 978-613-9630
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Tallyfy <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> 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> 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 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
> > > >>>>>>>>>> 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/
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>>>>>> 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/
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>>>>> 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/
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>>> 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/
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > 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/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>