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

Re: What are those enumerations after the breadcrumb's :: called?

From: Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 14:34:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CADE8KM7yZq-=Ej=oGDB7w5Ch-MNxAcRWA-uCjHteniAgNNAtig@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com>
Cc: kevin.polley@mutualadvantage.co.uk, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
I would note that the range of schema:contactType is schema:Text, and thus
not a schema:Enumeration.

Note that the supported values are English language phrases, with
spaces,etc.

Enumeration values, by contrast, are URIs, see e.g:

https://support.google.com/merchants/answer/6069143?hl=en

"For example, it is recommended that if you’re using enumerations and
canonical references to use the link tag with href, and to use the meta tag
with content for missing or implicit information."

Further to my remark yesterday wondering about where information about
Google required properties can be found, it seems that this information is
not available in machine readable form directly, but is given in a number
of different tabular formats on various type specific pages.

Some of the restrictions are country and category specific.
It may be possible to convert this information to machine readable form
using screen scraping, though I have not looked to see if there is RDFa or
microdata embedded in the tables.

I have not looked for corresponding restrictions for other partners.

Simon // Plutocratic Plange processor
On Jan 17, 2015 7:32 AM, "Jarno van Driel" <jarnovandriel@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Hope this helps"
>
> You have no idea how much that helped Dan. After sleeping on it, it now
> makes total sense to me. So, thanks! (you too Simon, and of course Gregg
> Kellogg as well, for making me raise my eyebrows about a month ago)
>
> "your a "happening" dude for asking these questions and learning"
>
> Shucks, you're making me blush.   :-)   I'm happy my curiosity is well
> received and I hope to return this generosity by passing your remarks on to
> others.
>
> "Let us know if you see some enumerations that probably should be made"
>
> Well, since you mentioned it, I think there might be some which probably
> should be added, depending on whether or not all the sponsors can live with
> adding values Google suggests for schema.org/contactType on
> http://bit.ly/1BHxFBS:
>
> "customer support"
> "technical support"
> "billing support"
> "bill payment"
> "sales"
> "reservations"
> "credit card support"
> "emergency"
> "baggage tracking"
> "roadside assistance"
> "package tracking"
>
> When I read these yesterday they immediately reminded me about Dan's
> comments in this thread:
>
>> "In general in schema.org, these enumerations serve are to give well known
>> *values* for properties."
>
>
> Now since Google recommends using these text values (as if they are
> Enumeration members), I predict it will only be a matter of time before
> they're 'well known'. So IMHO they seem to meet that criterion.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> "I am sure there are some in the longer tail domains like Medicine, etc."
>
> I'll make sure to do so when I run into them. But I don't think that'll be
> any time soon. It's not all that often I get a chance to work on longer
> tail domains because they're, well, long tail. I'm already happy to get a
> chance to currently 'play' around in the Medicine field but alas it's not
> all too often that type of domain crosses my path.
>
> 2015-01-16 21:32 GMT+01:00 Kevin Polley <
> kevin.polley@mutualadvantage.co.uk>:
>
>> +1
>> > Jarno,
>> >
>> > In summary, your a "happening" dude for asking these questions and
>> > learning. :)
>>
>> It helps all structured data elves.  Thx.
>>
>> Kevin
>> https://www.google.com/+KevinPolley
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Saturday, 17 January 2015 19:34:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 17 January 2015 19:34:44 UTC