W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-architypes@w3.org > February 2017

Re: Discussion about previous proposal

From: Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:10:33 +0000
Message-Id: <66F8067A-F5A7-40A5-A8FE-37833B122A9B@ostephens.com>
Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, "public-architypes@w3.org" <public-architypes@w3.org>
To: Jane Stevenson <Jane.Stevenson@jisc.ac.uk>
> On 16 Feb 2017, at 11:04, Jane Stevenson <Jane.Stevenson@jisc.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> It seems to me, if I’ve got this right, that CreativeWork is more generic and you can apply various properties to it without a more specific type? Or do you have to choose a more specific type? 

That’s correct. And since CreativeWork is a well established type in schema.org you can be reasonably confident for SERP purposes it will be found and used appropriately

Choosing more specific types would give you access to additional properties (e.g. if you want to assign a bookEdition property, you have to have type Book), but as you may not have that information in a structured format anyway, I’m guessing this won’t bother you

Owen
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2017 11:11:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 August 2018 13:28:59 UTC