W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > February 2015

Re: Proposal for Schema.org extension mechanism

From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 09:55:00 +0100
Message-ID: <54E301E4.4030301@wwelves.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
CC: Guha <guha@google.com>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
On 02/15/2015 03:14 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
...
> As you say there are plenty of details to work through. One thing to
> consider is the extend to which we might want to make use of the
> @context facilities of JSON-LD, to map between JSON structures and
> namespaced URIs. Whatever we do needs to work also for Microdata and
> RDFa
...

Could we consider looking at your last statement more in direction:
"Whatever we do needs to work with HTML (Microdata or RDFa)

So we don't require JSON-LD, make sure that people can use good old HTML
and then depending on complexity of data they want to publish, can
choose between Microdata or RDFa.

I also find RDFa Vocabulary Expansion quite interesting and lightweight
* http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_vocab_expansion

TL;DR
* rdf:type
* rdfs:subClassOf
* rdfs:subPropertyOf
* owl:equivalentClass
* owl:equivalentProperty

It looks similar to schema.org at least because it does not use
rdfs:domain & rdfs:range

On the other hand, Embedding JSON-LD in HTML Documents could also come
as solution here
* http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#embedding-json-ld-in-html-documents

Cheers!


Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2015 08:55:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 17 February 2015 08:55:23 UTC