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

Re: Socialnetworks of a person or organization

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 13:57:31 +0200
To: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@google.com>
Cc: "W3C Web Schemas Task Force" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.xd7ct502y3oazb@chaals.local>
TL;DR: schema:sameAs is a bad name because people think it is like  
owl:sameAs, but it is the pointer to things that can be used to identify  
something being described. In other words, what we want. The rest of the  
problem is to point to things people wrote, for which we need to resolve  
inverses, and then we can use the "author" property inverted.

More thinking inline:

On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 13:20:57 +0200, Justin Boyan <jaboyan@google.com>  

> 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.

I think we're seriously over complicating this. And forgetting that the  
people who are going to do the work aren't us.

> 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 .

When asked for something on the web to say who they are, some people use  
their website. Others use their LinkedIn/facebook/vkontakte/G+/terra/…  
account, twitter/weibo/… feed, blog, skype handle, OpenID, etc etc.

Many people don't own a domain, but consider their facebook or G+ account  
as their website. I don't think we help the world, or even schema.org, by  
telling them they are wrong.

For each of these examples, there are others who categorically deny that  
they *are* in any way each of the examples above.

One of the things we are looking for is a way of figuring out who someone  
is, by relating information about them to more information about them.

This seems to be a human (but definitely not OWL) "sameAs" kind of thing.  
Having the same name as owl:sameAs strikes me as a mistake, but  
essentially we want a term that means "Something with a URL that  
'identifies' a person - maybe a webpage, or an account on a social  
network" and as far as I know that's the current meaning of schema:sameAs.

On the other hand, there are things that people publish. We make it  
trivially easy to point from a metadata record of a creativeWork to its  
author, which is great for librarians professional and amateur, but as far  
as I know we have no way to say "I (the person being described in this  
schema.org fragment) am the author of my blog, some comments on newspaper  
articles, and a collection of photos of cats that I copied from somewhere".

The simplest way to resolve this would be to resolve the outstanding issue  
of inverse properties. People can then simply use the inverse mechanism of  
"author" to say what they wrote. (For a long time instead of having my own  
blog I consciously collected pointers to my comments on others', which  
represented, collectively, my published thoughts).



> 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.
> Justin
>  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

Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Saturday, 12 April 2014 11:58:07 UTC

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