W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > April 2014

Re: Socialnetworks of a person or organization

From: Kevin Marks <kevinmarks@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 07:38:14 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6ztsr=FJtkiCkpjdhO9vX_QbLk4dv2pkAX4WoviapF0t-eDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>
Cc: David Deering <david@touchpointdigital.net>, Public Vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
The existing rel="me" links do that for all kinds of sites ash's pages, but
is SameAs used to make assertions about sites other than the current one?
Per Dan's discussion of the multifaceted nature of some links,
rel="author" is established for this case too.
On 9 Apr 2014 08:28, "Jason Douglas" <jasondouglas@google.com> wrote:

> Adding to that... if the claim is that authorship or control should be
> verified out of band, then one of the common mechanisms for doing that is
> bi-directional links.  If we lump everything under sameAs, we could end up
> with bidirectional links for both the Wikipedia page and the Facebook
> profile.
> On Wed Apr 09 2014 at 8:24:31 AM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>
> wrote:
>> -1  There's a difference between reference pages *about* the same entity
>> and pages authored/controlled *by* the same entity.
>> On Wed Apr 09 2014 at 8:18:36 AM, David Deering <
>> david@touchpointdigital.net> wrote:
>>>  Sounds good to me, Dan.  It would make things simpler and cleaner.
>>> David
>>> On 4/9/2014 10:11 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
>>> Revisiting this and the recent socialAccount thread,http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Apr/0046.html
>>> There seems to be broad agreement that it would be good for schema.org
>>> to recommend a pattern for marking up links to (broadly) social
>>> network profile pages, e.g. Twitter. However a few people have raised
>>> the concern that adding another property will add more confusion
>>> around existing options, particularly 'url' and 'sameAs'.
>>> Therefore, a minimalistic revised proposal: that we address this
>>> scenario using 'sameAs' directly.
>>> I suggest http://schema.org/sameAs
>>> "URL of a reference Web page that unambiguously indicates the item's
>>> identity. E.g. the URL of the item's Wikipedia page, Freebase page, or
>>> official website." therefore becomes
>>> "URL of a reference Web page that unambiguously indicates the item's
>>> identity. E.g. the URL of the item's Wikipedia page, Freebase page, a
>>> profile page on a social site, or official website."
>>> We should also add examples at least for Person, Organization and
>>> MusicGroup to illustrate this.
>>> Following the example in the wiki athttps://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SocialAccountProperty the usage
>>> then would be something like:
>>> <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person" <http://schema.org/Person>>
>>> <span itemprop="name">Stephen Fry</span>
>>>     (<a itemprop="url" href="http://www.stephenfry.com/" <http://www.stephenfry.com/>>stephenfry.com</a>,
>>>      <a itemprop="sameAs" href="http://twitter.com/stephenfry" <http://twitter.com/stephenfry>>twitter</a>,
>>> <a itemprop="sameAs"
>>> href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Fry" <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Fry>>wikipedia</a>)
>>> </div>
>>> This has the advantage of not requiring the (endlessly evolving and
>>> slippery) notion of 'social' to be defined. Or 'account' for that
>>> matter. It removes some worry for publishers, "am I using
>>> 'socialAccount' when I should be using 'sameAs' or vice-versa?). It
>>> carries a little less meaning, but not a lot. Someone writing an app
>>> to find twitter links will know just what they need to do. If your
>>> goal is to sort 'social' from 'other kinds of authority page', you'll
>>> need out-of-band information of some kind. But that was likely also
>>> going to be the case even if we added a new property 'socialAccount'.
>>> How does this sound?
>>> Dan
>>>   (sameAs <http://twitter.com/danbri/> <http://twitter.com/danbri/>)
>>> p.s. just a reminder, schema.org's notion of sameAs allows for
>>> identity reference pages as values, e.g. hints for entity
>>> identification. It does not mean 'numerical identity', i.e.
>>> self-same-thing; for that you could use owl:sameAs.
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2014 14:38:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:39 UTC