- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 00:57:14 +0100
- To: Augusto Herrmann <augusto.herrmann@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
Hi again, I also had some thoughts about the general vocabulary usage in your page. This is a bit more speculative, but I hope it can give you some ideas. On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Augusto Herrmann <augusto.herrmann@gmail.com> wrote: > The examples are displayed as (escaped) html code in the rightside > panel on the following page: http://vocab.e.gov.br/2011/03/vcge > > People are meant to copy/paste the code, or just read and undestand, > in order to learn how to mark up their own pages stating that it's > about a subject in this controlled vocabulary. That's why we left the > reference to the page as an empty relative URL (which should resolve > to whatever address the page is loaded into). > > But we also did eat our own dog food: that page also states it's about > the VCGE controlled vocabulary, by using RDFa 1.1 and Microdata like > this (lines 21-25): > > <!-- Marking up subject using RDFa: the page is about VCGE --> > <meta property="http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject" > content="http://vocab.e.gov.br/2011/03/vcge#esquema" /> > > <!-- Marking up subject using Microdata: the page is about VCGE --> > <meta itemscope itemprop="http://schema.org/about" > content="http://vocab.e.gov.br/2011/03/vcge#esquema" /> > > The triple that should be extracted from the RDFa is: > > <http://vocab.e.gov.br/2011/03/vcge> dcterms:subject > <http://vocab.e.gov.br/2011/03/vcge#esquema> . [See my previous mail for using <link> + @href instead of <meta> + @content.] In RDFa (1.0 and 1.1) it is explicitly allowed to use several predicates at once (in @property, @rel and @rev) to provide consumers limited to certain vocabularies with triples directed specifically towards them (similarly you can use multiple classes in @typeof). So to cater both for consumers who only understand schema.org terms and consumers of Dublin Core, FOAF etc. -- at this stage of the web data evolution -- it may be good to publish all triples you expect to be relevant for your intended audiences. E.g. like: <link rel="dc:subject foaf:primaryTopic http://schema.org/about" href="http://vocab.e.gov.br/2011/03/vcge#esquema" /> While this isn't the limited form called Lite, that form of RDFa is targeted towards *publishers* with limited needs of RDFa. Thus, if your publishing needs also include consumers of DC and FOAF, and you don't wish to repeat things, I'd expect this form to be preferable. (It all depends on the consumer needs and requirements of scalable usage.) Notice also that any schema.org predicates and classes can really be used everywhere. That is, they are possible to use in any RDFa (i.e. any RDF). Although the schema.org URIs do not resolve to data in RDF directly (which admittedly is a requirement for proper linked data vocabularies), schema.org do host an OWL definition of them at [1]. The schema.org ontology doesn't define a semantic equivalence between e.g. <http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject> and <http://schema.org/about> though. But it's not unreasonable to expect some relation to that (and/or foaf:primarySubject), ideally formally stated in the future. See [2], especially [3] and e.g. [4] for more on that. RDFa 1.1 specifies a form of vocabulary expansion using a subset of the OWL semantics at [5], which can be leveraged in different ways depending both on used vocabularies, and *especially* on the capability of consumers. Note that this is an *optional* feature of RDFa 1.1 processors! So don't expect the general search engines to support these things today. Hopefully though they will come to understand more vocabulary semantics and interlinking over time, and also that even more vocabularies and data publishers will leverage these semantics. This will prevent reinvention and "babelification", enable reusable and mixable data vocabularies on a general level, and support generally compatible specialization where needed. Best regards, Niklas [1]: http://schema.org/docs/schemaorg.owl [2]: http://schema.rdfs.org/ [3]: http://schema.rdfs.org/mappings.html [4]: http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/Schema.org_Alignment/Mappings [5]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-rdfa-core-20111215/#s_vocab_expansion
Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2012 23:58:03 UTC