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

Re: Proposal: add properties for place accessibility

From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:59:04 +0200
To: "ding c. (cd8e10)" <cd8e10@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-Id: <25031411120744@webcorp02g.yandex-team.ru>
Hello Chaohai,

sorry to take such a long time to reply.

23.03.2014, 23:36, "ding c. (cd8e10)" <cd8e10@ecs.soton.ac.uk>:
> Hi,
> I am currently a PhD student focus on the research of using open data and linked data to enhance accessibility. During my currently research, I would not find any accessibility related properties for places in schema.org (as well as dbpedia ontologies). Although there is some accessibility properties for web content (accessibilityAPI, accessibilityControl, accessibilityFeature, accessibilityHazard), there is no metadata to describe the places accessibility, therefore, is it possible to propose a list of properties for place accessibility metadata. A simple example would be as follows:
> property ššššššššššššššššššššššššššššštype šššššššššššššššššššššexpected value
> isWheelchairAccessible šššššššššššššštext yes|limited|no|none
> isMobilityImprAccessib ššššššššštext yes|limited|no|none
> isVisualImpairmentAccessible šššštext yes|limited|no|none
> isHearImparimentAccessible šššššštext yes|limited|no|none
> or we could extend the current accessibility vocabularies for CreativeWork to places accessibility:

I have created a testing branch with a *very* experimental approach, that takes a tiny subset of the information we really should have - whether a place is wheelchairFriendly.

It has two propoerties:

https://sdo-wip1.appspot.com/wheelchairFriendlyNotes whose range is text (including URI) - the idea is to describe *how* a place tries to be wheelchairFriendly

https://sdo-wip1.appspot.com/isWheelchairUnfriendly is a boolean, where "True" means you'll probably have a hard time getting around this place with a wheelchair.

They both apply to Place.

My thinking is that we should encourage people who are describing how accessible their bar/restaurant/volcano/iceHockeyRink is to actually describe it, not just say "Of course I am", whereas the second one is more oriented in my mind at Review writers.

And my overall goal is to get some experience of how ordinary webmasters use this in practice before we try to settle on a "serious" version. I'm concerned that when we add big chunks of things from specialised knowledge fields and ask non-specialists to use them that we get a mismatch, which makes the data less useful than we hope it will be.

Anyway, I am interested in your comments and thoughts (as well as those of other people interested in this topic, of course).



Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Friday, 19 September 2014 09:59:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:44 UTC