Re: Web Services?

That kind of relationship might work.

You could describe the service in detail from the Service endpoint only
needing a simple potentialAction triple on the resource description.

You don’t normally find Schema.org markup in a link header.  It is more
targeted at a fuller description of the entity embedded in html Microdata,
RDFa or JSON-LD in script tag(s).

~Richard

Richard Wallis
Founder, Data Liberate
http://dataliberate.com
Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
Twitter: @rjw

On 9 March 2016 at 23:04, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Thanks Richard!
> Action and potentialAction seem to play a role here -- could there be a
> link from the Action to the ServiceChannel where the action can be
> performed?
>
> Image potentialAction AnnotationAction .
> AnnotationAction performedAt AnnoServiceChannel .
> AnnoServiceChannel providesService AnnotationService ;
>       serviceUrl UrlToPostAnnotationTo .
>
> That would be at least a good chain to get from the resource to the
> serviceChannel, though clearly doesn't yet fit in a simple link header.  If
> there isn't an obvious candidate, we can use sioc-services:has_service ...
> but would (of course) prefer to align with schema than a module of an
> ontology that hasn't seen as much adoption :)
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Rob
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Richard Wallis <
> richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote:
>
>> Wondering if this could be handled with a new subtype of UpdateAction
>> <http://schema.org/UpdateAction>. An AnnotateAction might work well with
>> AddAction, DeleteAction and ReplaceAction as sibling types.
>>
>> So a resulting markup might look like:
>>
>> <script type=“application/ld+json”>
>> {
>>   “@context”: “http://schema.org”,
>>   “@type”: “ImageObject”,
>>   “@id”: “http://example.org/diagram.jpg”,
>>   “name”: “Diagram 1”,
>>   “potentialAction”: {
>>            “@type”: “AnnotateAction”,
>>            “url”: “http://example.org/services/annotations/“
>>     }
>> }
>> </script>
>>
>>
>> ~Richard.
>>
>> Richard Wallis
>> Founder, Data Liberate
>> http://dataliberate.com
>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
>> Twitter: @rjw
>>
>> On 8 March 2016 at 18:35, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Dear Schema folks,
>>>
>>> In the W3C Web Annotation Working Group, we have defined a (simple,
>>> RESTy, JSON-LD based) protocol [1] for interactions between clients and
>>> servers. We would love to have a way to discover those services, from web
>>> pages and indeed any web resource.
>>>
>>> Our current approach is to have a link header from any resource to the
>>> URL of the service, however if we could align with any existing approaches
>>> in the broader schema.org community, this seems valuable. In trawling
>>> for the appropriate classes and predicates, the closest seems to be
>>> ServiceChannel, however it /has/ a serviceUrl, rather than being the
>>> service that is identified by the URL.
>>>
>>> The relationship we're looking for is: (some web resource) has_service
>>> (web service URL)
>>> Along the lines of:
>>>     http://example.org/diagram.jpg has_service
>>> http://example.org/services/annotations/
>>> That could be added in a link header, <link> element, or in a JSON-LD
>>> description of the resource.
>>>
>>> Any advice would be appreciated :)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Rob Sanderson
>>>
>>> [1] Draft: http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/protocol/wd/
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rob Sanderson
>>> Information Standards Advocate
>>> Digital Library Systems and Services
>>> Stanford, CA 94305
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Rob Sanderson
> Information Standards Advocate
> Digital Library Systems and Services
> Stanford, CA 94305
>