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

Re: Socialnetworks of a person or organization

From: Justin Boyan <jaboyan@google.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 11:42:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CABJSzUuQu0F4g_sOJcjwsmuN5rF7c0yx+GCVpNCCvY_mHaFXWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Cc: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
I'm going to +1 Dan's first post on this thread, where he suggested reusing
sameAs for this purpose and not introducing a new top-level property.

sameAs already exists to allow linking to a reference page for an entity,
like its Wikipedia page, Freebase page, or website (DNS registry page). The
social sites motivating the 'hasAccount' proposal -- Facebook, Twitter, G+,
LinkedIn, etc. -- can equally be viewed as catalogs of entities. The issue
of who controls the data for that entity on the site is a slippery issue
that wouldn't be captured in the account vs. sameAs distinction anyway.

In fact, sameAs is actually clearer semantically than 'hasAccount':  an
organization like the BBC with many Twitter accounts might be tempted to
list all of them under 'hasAccount', whereas sameAs more clearly limits the
desired link to just the top-level account for the BBC as a whole. (Twitter
accounts for suborganizations of the BBC would be better modeled via sameAs
links from entities corresponding to those suborganizations.)

I don't see any particular semantic gain from { BBC hasAccount
twitter.com/BBC } compared to { BBC sameAs twitter.com/BBC }.

Whereas, I'm concerned that webmasters will become ever more confused when
they have to worry about hasAccount alongside the existing sameAs, url, and
@id on every single schema.org type.

My $0.02.

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>wrote:

>  On 4/11/14 9:45 AM, Thad Guidry wrote:
> Back to the original thread discussion ....
>  which is very important to Web Developers (which are actually the
> Schema.org stakeholders little elves, for crying out loud, otherwise your
> little toys will not be made !)
>  +1 for new property "account" on Thing.
>  --
> -Thad
> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
> Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>
> I didn't divert this thread, I responded to specific comments, and didn't
> feel it was my place to change the topic heading.
> FWIW: "hasAccount" is clearer that "account".
> --
> Regards,
> Kingsley Idehen	
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Received on Friday, 11 April 2014 15:43:16 UTC

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