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

Re: working of schema.org/WebPage

From: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 13:57:23 -0400
To: Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl>
Cc: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>, Jocelyn Fournier <jocelyn.fournier@gmail.com>, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20140420175722.GA22868@denials>
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 07:04:54PM +0200, Jarno van Driel wrote:
>What I find confusing about WebPage (+ it's subclasses) and it's relation
>to WebPageElement(s) (+ it's subClasses) is where does it fit into the
>whole (literally)?
>What I understand about semantic techniques until thus far is that they're
>a way to explain what a page is about, what entities it contains, what
>their individual meaning is and what their relations are relative to each
>other. All quite abstract concepts since they're supposed to describe
>Yet when I'm marking up a WebPage, including it's WebPageElement(s), trying
>to chain it all together, to me it seems like I'm describing the domtree.
>Now one can argue that when I'm doing this I actually am defining the
>relations between entities, but there's nothing abstract about it. The only
>thing it describes is the order of the DOM: a WebPage, its
>WebPageElement(s) and the Things it/they contain.


>And to complicate things even further, not everything needed to chain
>everything together, while expressing the right context, is available:
>1] Being able to define the main (or a collection of) entity of a WebPage.
>@mainContentOfPage only accepts a text value??? (I agree with Jason;'s:
>"Let's fix it!")

Hmm. http://schema.org/mainContentOfPage says it accepts a
WebPageElement, not Text.

>2] No clear properties are available to connect WebPageElements to a
>WebPage. So far I have been using @mentions to connect Things together, eg.
>WebPage > mentions > WPSideBar, because there's nothing else for this. A
>better property (eg. @child, @contains, @has, @part, @DOMElement) seems
>missing to me since I'm describing the DOM and not a relation like: Guha >
>colleagueOf > Dan.

The proposed domain and range changes of "isPartOf" (elevating it to
CreativeWork, and enabling it to point at a CreativeWork) and the
addition of "hasPart" in
might be of interest to you.

(And hey, if you want to go and +1 that proposal so it can become an
official thing, the pertinent thread is at:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Apr/0058.html )

Received on Sunday, 20 April 2014 17:57:56 UTC

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