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: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 07:20:57 -0400
Message-ID: <CABJSzUsm0i8+h49Nw=whw5xvpXF=BCUsGqW8fTaoBP=_aCFAXQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
Cc: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Does the official website belong in sameAs or account?  It sounds like
people think sameAs shouldn't be used for sites that the entity controls,
for some reason.

Which property would be used to reference the TripAdvisor page for a
business, where the content is partially controlled by the business owner
(if claimed) and partially controlled by the site?  Similar hybrid models
are common, eg. bandpage.com, researchgate.net .

Suppose Wikipedia added a feature that let authorities claim certain
attributes of their infoboxes and edit them directly. Then would the
Wikipedia links all have to migrate from sameAs to account?

In the end I don't strongly oppose adding a new property; I'd just like to
make sure we can be really clear about the distinction we're asking authors
to make because there are so many URL properties on Thing already.

 On Apr 11, 2014 7:51 PM, "Aaron Bradley" <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think Thad typifies the difference between the "regular web" and the
> "social web" (and it is indeed an important one for marketers) well when he
> says:
> > The difference between the 2 is that one has the context of "allows a
> communication pathway to an Organization or Person"...versus those that are
> not constructed to really have communication to a Organization or Person".
> Or - as I might have mentioned before - the "regular web" references
> resources *about* an entity, whereas the social web references resources
> that emanate *from* an entity.  In regard to the referenced entity the
> former is passive, the latter active (or at least  potentially so) - it's
> the difference between a third and person narrative.
> Is the Wikipedia page *about *Monsanto in the same category as the
> Twitter account run *by* Monsanto?  I sure don't think so, and I think
> that its useful for data consumers to be able to distinguish between these
> two classes of identifiers when returning information about the entity in
> question.
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>wrote:
>>  On 4/11/14 4:06 PM, Jarno van Driel wrote:
>> Being a non-illuminati I think simple. The description of sameAs mentions
>> about the item's identity. Now for me my 'identity' isn't defined by a
>> Youtube channel where I share random stuff I like on the web. I am no
>> @VideoGallery, I'm me, a real life person and not a collection of videos.
>> Dan's example in HTML+Microdata (which by notation choice
>> **inadvertently** blurs visibility of the relation semantics in play) :
>> <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>
>> Turtle  translation:
>> <> <http://www.w3.org/ns/md#item> <http://www.w3.org/ns/md#item> [
>>        <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
>> <http://schema.org/Person> <http://schema.org/Person>;
>>        <http://schema.org/name> <http://schema.org/name> "Stephen Fry";
>>        <http://schema.org/sameAs> <http://schema.org/sameAs>
>> <http://twitter.com/stephenfry> <http://twitter.com/stephenfry>,
>>        <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Fry><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Fry>;
>>        <http://schema.org/url> <http://schema.org/url>
>> <http://www.stephenfry.com/> <http://www.stephenfry.com/>
>>      ];
>> <http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#usesVocabulary><http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#usesVocabulary>
>> <http://schema.org/> <http://schema.org/> .
>> What does Dan's example demonstrate?
>> The function of a **pronoun** in a sentence or statement. Basically, the
>> example makes the following claim, using terms from <http://schema.org/><http://schema.org/>(a Vocabulary):
>> Someone or something has determined the existence of an entity that has
>> the following discernible attributes:
>> Name: "Stephen Fry"
>> Type: Person
>> referencedBy: <http://twitter.com/stephenfry><http://twitter.com/stephenfry>,
>> <http://twitter.com/stephenfry> <http://twitter.com/stephenfry>,
>> <http://www.stephenfry.com/> <http://www.stephenfry.com/> .
>> Personally, I wouldn't denote a relationship predicate/property for this
>> relation, in this manner, due to the **equivalence** intuition.
>> Alternatives inclued:
>> 1. referencedBy
>> 2. subjectOf
>> 3. identifiedBy -- this is my personal favorite .
>> --
>> 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 Saturday, 12 April 2014 11:21:25 UTC

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