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: <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 16:05:09 +0200
Cc: Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl>, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, 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>
Message-Id: <08A3CA66-D9A2-4F2F-AC27-58F33DA50D19@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
+1

Best wishes / Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Martin Hepp



On 20 May 2014, at 16:03, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:

> +1 From over here too
> 
> ~Richard
> 
> On 20 May 2014, at 14:42, Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl> wrote:
> 
>> 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 14:05:41 UTC

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