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

Re: What is schema.org? A technical briefing paper

From: Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 11:46:12 +0100
Message-ID: <53919BF4.8070803@hw.ac.uk>
To: Liddy Nevile <liddy@sunriseresearch.org>
CC: Lorna M Campbell <lorna.m.campbell@icloud.com>, public-vocabs@w3.org

Thanks again Liddy. As you know this briefing a step in explaining the 
technical work of LRMI, the Learning Resource Metadata Initiative, so 
the relationship to ISO MLR is definitely of interest. I think that 
relationship would best be expressed at a conceptual/modeling level and 
as such shouldn't depend on the syntax used.

Phil

On 06/06/2014 09:55, Liddy Nevile wrote:
> Phil
> basically the reason I am suggesting the RDFa is that I think you guys 
> have done a great job but as we have now developed the ISO Metadata 
> for Learning Resources standard (ISO 19788), and it is very RDF 
> compliant, I think it'd help a lot of people if we could point to your 
> explanation and show a consistent way of using the terms with both 
> schema.org and the MLR - which is what I am working on in the 
> AccessForAll standard (ISO 24751), for example.
>
> I cannot write the code myself but if you agree it'd help, I am sure 
> we can find someone who can ...
>
> Liddy
>
> On 06/06/2014, at 4:07 PM, Phil Barker wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hello Liddy, thank you for your comments. Part of the reason for the 
>> emphasis on microdata over RDFa is the inordinately long time it took 
>> me to write the briefing (Lorna was much prompter with her 
>> contributions). I started before the recent updates that put RDFa and 
>> JSON-LD on an equal footing on the schema.org site in terms of 
>> examples etc. I didn't have space for bilingual examples in microdata 
>> and RDFa and didn't want to use one syntax while the main site I 
>> would recommend for people who decide to implement schema used the 
>> other. Also, I must admit find microdata easier that RDFa and I find 
>> it easier to explain schema.org in terms of microdata (yes I know 
>> RDFa lite 1.1 is easier that RDFa, but that's one more thing to 
>> explain).
>> I hope the code examples are enough to illustrate the schema.org 
>> approach, I didn't really want to go to far into the syntax options.  
>> The publication is licensed cc-by (and we'll be putting editable text 
>> online soon), if someone wants to produce an RDFa version I'ld be 
>> happy to do what  I can to help.
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>
>> Sent from my ASUS Pad
>>
>> Liddy Nevile <liddy@sunriseresearch.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Phil and Lorna
>>> thanks for this really useful work -
>>>
>>> My only comment is a little sadness that you seem to privilege
>>> microdata over RDFa etc... You say that microdata is the most
>>> frequently used but, IMHO, you contribute to that situation by making
>>> it easy for folks to use microdata but don't show how to use RDFa. Of
>>> course you do refer to it etc but I wonder if in an explanation of
>>> schema.org that is sure to become very popular, it'd be good to
>>> include both approaches?
>>>
>>> Liddy
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/06/2014, at 1:57 AM, Phil Barker wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello all.
>>>> I hope you don't mind me using this list to advertise a briefing
>>>> paper which aims to describe schema.org. I also invite comments and
>>>> discussion on how it might be improved in future revisions.
>>>>
>>>> As part of our work for Creative Commons on managing the Learning
>>>> Resource Metadata Initiative (LRMI), Cetis today publish a new
>>>> technical briefing paper “What is schema.org?”.
>>>>
>>>> We often find that when explaining the technology approach of LRMI
>>>> we are mostly talking about schema.org, so this briefing, which
>>>> describes the schema.org specification for a technical audience
>>>> should be of interest to anyone thinking about implementing or using
>>>> LRMI in a website or other tool. It should also be of interest to
>>>> people who plan to use schema.org for describing other types of
>>>> resource.
>>>>
>>>> You can download the briefing from 
>>>> http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/2014/960
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Phil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Phil Barker           @philbarker
>>>> LRMI, Cetis, ICBL     http://people.pjjk.net/phil
>>>> Heriot-Watt University
>>>>
>>>> Ubuntu: http://xkcd.com/456/
>>>> not so much an operating system as a learning opportunity.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Sunday Times Scottish University of the Year 2011-2013
>>>> Top in the UK for student experience
>>>> Fourth university in the UK and top in Scotland (National Student
>>>> Survey 2012)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We invite research leaders and ambitious early career researchers to
>>>> join us in leading and driving research in key inter-disciplinary
>>>> themes. Please see www.hw.ac.uk/researchleaders for further
>>>> information and how
>>>> to apply.
>>>>
>>>> Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity
>>>> registered under charity number SC000278.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>


-- 
Phil Barker           @philbarker
LRMI, Cetis, ICBL     http://people.pjjk.net/phil
Heriot-Watt University

Ubuntu: http://xkcd.com/456/
not so much an operating system as a learning opportunity.



----- 
Sunday Times Scottish University of the Year 2011-2013
Top in the UK for student experience
Fourth university in the UK and top in Scotland (National Student Survey 2012)


We invite research leaders and ambitious early career researchers to 
join us in leading and driving research in key inter-disciplinary themes. 
Please see www.hw.ac.uk/researchleaders for further information and how
to apply.

Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity
registered under charity number SC000278.
Received on Friday, 6 June 2014 10:46:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:42 UTC