- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 20:56:53 +0100
- To: "'Sam Goto'" <goto@google.com>
- Cc: "'Yaar Schnitman'" <yaar@google.com>, "'Alexander Shubin'" <ajax@yandex-team.ru>, "'W3C Web Schemas Task Force'" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, <public-hydra@w3.org>
On Monday, November 18, 2013 7:39 PM, Sam Goto wrote: > > > The other difference is that gmail allows you to specify requirements > > > for "sub-properties": you can say that "review.reviewRating.ratingValue" > > > is a required property in the Action instance (example). Thoughts? > > > > That's a bit underspecified in Hydra at the moment I think. Currently the > > idea is to use a property's range which again is a class that specifies it's > > supportedProperties. That way you get your overall structure. I don't > > particularly like micro-syntaxes such as "review.reviewRating.ratingValue" > > because they tend to work well just in a few very-well defined cases. In > > this case, e.g., I see problems if you need to mix multiple vocabularies > > (granted, not something schema.org typically cares much about). > > Any other case where this wouldn't work well? I haven't thought about this much yet but another case might be if you have a property whose values may be of different types. The value of a "creator" property, e.g., could be either a company or a person. If it is a company you may want to require the company's name and its homepage. When it's a person you require the given name and the last name. Please note that those properties are required. But as said.. I need to think about this a bit more -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 19:57:32 UTC