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

RE: ActionHandlers vs "App resources" (was: An updated draft of the schema.org/Action proposal)

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 16:30:48 +0100
To: "'Sam Goto'" <goto@google.com>
Cc: "'Jason Johnson'" <jasjoh@microsoft.com>, "'W3C Web Schemas Task Force'" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, <public-hydra@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01b501cf37be$b90a07f0$2b1e17d0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Monday, March 03, 2014 11:40 PM, Sam Goto wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> > On Monday, March 03, 2014 7:11 PM, Sam Goto wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> > > > You'd have specific action handlers attached to the action. Example
> > > > (of a Movie that can be "watched" on android and "bought" via a
> > > > webpage):
> > > >
> > > > {
> > > > @type: Movie
> > > > action: [{
> > > >   @type: WatchAction
> > > >   handler: {
> > > >     @type: AndroidHandler
> > > >   }
> > > > }, {
> > > >   @type: BuyAction
> > > >    handler: {
> > > >      @type: WebPageHandler
> > > >   }
> > > > }
> > > > ]
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > How would we go about this using sameAs/alternate?
> > >
> > > You would use a very similar pattern (adapting your previous example):
> > >
> > > {
> > >  "@context": "http://schema.org",
> > >  "@id": "http://example.com/web/resource",
> > >  "alternate": [ {
> > >      "@type": "AndroidAppLink",
> > >      "operation": {
> > >        "@type": "WatchAction"
> > >    }, {
> > >      "@type": "ApiLink",
> > >      "operation": {
> > >        "@type": "BuyAction"
> > >    }
> > >  ]
> > > }
> > >
> > > Hum ... this doesn't seem right to me ... I wasn't expecting actions to
> > > be attached to these "Links", since there is a difference between
> > > "watching" a movie and "watching" a link.
> > 
> > Right, I just reused your terminology to show the pattern. I wouldn't
> > call those things *Link as a link is an arc between two resources and
> > not a single resource as these things here are. Would it look better
> > to you if you would replace, e.g. AndroidAppLink with
> > AndroidAppResource?
> 
> That's still a bit awkward. You'd want to have a WatchAction attached
> to a Movie, rather than a generic AndroidAppResource (which may refer
> to any type). 

Can't it be both at the same time? I hope we are not heading down the httpRange-14 path now :-)



Cheers,
Markus


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2014 15:31:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:37 UTC