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

Re: Generic Property-Value Proposal for Schema.org

From: <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 00:44:16 +0200
Cc: Francois-Paul Servant <francoispaulservant@gmail.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-Id: <390C6870-C1C7-460C-95FA-88E99D4F77B7@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
Thad:

On 01 May 2014, at 16:53, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:

> Francois,
> 
> That's because this:
> 
> foo:YourBook schema:additionalProperty x:MartinHeppThePerson.
> 
> is missing the sub-property for the right context... I.E.  it's missing the word "author"
> 
> 1. perhaps that missing context needs to somehow use "additionalType" ?
> 
> 2. maybe context should just be the "scope" of the Property-Value pairing?
> 
> In Schema.org .. Contexts and Kinds are referred to and modeled actually as Types. ..(well, that's how we CURRENTLY have Schema.org designed).
> 
> But Martin's proposal presents a slight variation on the CURRENT Design...that we need, but that we need to get right...and it can be a work in progress starting at Products & Places. Agreed.
> 
> Martin,
> 
>  The new proposal looks fine to me... just wondering about how to handle missing Context, as Francois is hitting upon...would that be through the use of "additionalType" or "scope" or something else ?  Can you mock up an example for his Sunroof case ?
> 

I think that an additional context in the form of more precise product type information is valuable, yet not required. Sometimes, an existing schema.org type will already give enough context, e.g. for a car:

<div itemtype="http://schema.org/Car">
  <img itemprop="image" src="station_waggon123.jpg" />
  <span itemprop="name">Station Waggon 123</span>
  <div itemprop="additionalProperty" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PropertyValue">
	  <span itemprop="name">Sunroof</span>:
	  <meta itemprop="value" content="True">Yes
  </div>  
</div>

Sometimes using an external type with additionalType or plain RDFa or JSON-LD will be recommended, as in

<div itemtype="http://schema.org/Product">
  <span itemprop="name">ACME Port Wine</span>
  <div itemprop="additionalProperty" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PropertyValue">
	  <span itemprop="name">Alcohol by volume </span>:
	  <span itemprop="value">16 %</span>
  </div>  
</div>


I think that multi-typing (http://schema.org/Product in combination with external type URIs) and the new mechanism for properties will go hand-in hand, depending on which data the sites can provide, and maybe which incentives the sponsors of schema.org set for exposing more granular / more specific data.

Martin

> -- 
> -Thad
> +ThadGuidry
> Thad on LinkedIn
Received on Friday, 2 May 2014 22:44:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:41 UTC