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

Re: Proposal: "associatedMedia" property for schema.org/Thing (was: Why is the video property bound to creative work?)

From: Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 15:42:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFQgrbaS2mQfhWi8ADNw9FAkLjrhgbHLPhQoX19A3oyS-5VNmw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
Cc: "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Laura Dawson <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Thanks for that Dan1 And of course a big +1 from me.

On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:

> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:28:02PM +0200, Jarno van Driel wrote:
> <snip>
>  And just to keep it simple, I'm looking for a property to say something
>> like:
>> MedicalProcedure >associatedMedia > VideoObject, or
>> Product > video > VideoObject
>> And I'm not all that interested in what the name of this property should
>> be, as long as I can express the relation in this order, I'm happy. Now
>> CreativeWork (and it's subClasses) can express this in different ways but
>> no entity besides that can.
>> I wonder why and what can be done to fix this?
> Well, let's put together a formal proposal to change the domain of the
> associatedMedia property to Thing. The benefit is that we would cover
> AudioObject, DataDownload, ImageObject, MusicVideoObject, VideoObject,
> and any other MediaObject subclass that comes into being.
> The adjusted RDFS would look like:
> <div typeof="rdf:Property" resource="http://schema.org/associatedMedia">
>  <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">associatedMedia</span>
>  <span property="rdfs:comment">The media objects that encode or complement
> this item.</span>
>  <span>Domain: <a property="http://schema.org/domainIncludes" href="
> http://schema.org/Thing">Thing</a></span>
>  <span>Range: <a property="http://schema.org/rangeIncludes" href="
> http://schema.org/MediaObject">MediaObject</a></span>
> </div>
> Note that the rdfs:comment would no longer include the statement "This
> property is a synonym for encodings." This is justifiable because a)
> "encodings" is a deprecated term for "encoding" anyway and b) because
> "associated media" suggests a looser affiliation with the containing
> type (thus the addition of "or complement" to the comment) than
> "encoding" which suggests a stricter relationship and c) maintaining
> purely synonymous properties where one of the properties has not been
> superceded is not a best practice, so let's differentiate the properties
> according to their names.
> If we wanted to go further, we could deprecate the roughly duplicated
> (but more specific) properties by adding "supercededBy" clauses to the
> likes of image, audio, and video. But let's not go there; keeping the
> simplest things easy to do has a lot of value, and associatedMedia is
> most likely to be embraced by those who are seeking to express more than
> the simplest of structured data.
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2014 13:43:08 UTC

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