- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 08:49:18 -0800
- To: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Niklas, I hope you don't mind if I take advantage of your knowledge for another round of questions... 1) is it acceptable practice to define a term in more than one schema? Or is it preferable to define your "thing" as being subordinate to multiple schemas? (I have looked and cannot find any examples of terms being "re-defined" in separate sub-classes.) 2) if I were to define a term that had been previously used (like "isbn") but give it a different definition, that would be an error, right? and would not be allowed? kc On 2/9/13 2:56 AM, Niklas Lindström wrote: > Hi Karen, > > On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >> Great, owen. I'll work on proposal 2 since that seems to be the mostly >> likely one in my set. I'm not clear about repetition of property names in >> schema.org -- is it legit to have two schemas that both have a property >> "isbn"? I believe this was discussed either here or on the public-vocab >> list, and I was left with the impression that the URI pattern is >> >> http://schema.org/[property] > > Yes, that's correct. (So the URI for "isbn" is > <http://schema.org/isbn>. DanBri has said that those shall eventually > resolve as well.) > >> and not >> >> http://schema.org/Book/[property] >> http://schema.org/Audiobook/[property] > > Indeed. As Jeff also replied, this pattern is for uncontrolled > user-derived classes. > >> Can anyone confirm? Because that would knock out a couple of the options >> that are currently on the page. > > Schema.org properties can belong to more than one class (have more > than one domain), which don't have to be subclasses of one another. > > Quoting [1]: > > [[[ > 1. each property may have one or more types as its domains. The > property may be used for instances of any of these types. > 2. each property may have one or more types as its ranges. The > value(s) of the property should be instances of at least one of these > types. > > The decision to allow multiple domains and ranges was purely > pragmatic. While the computational properties of systems with a single > domain and range are easier to understand, in practice, this forces > the creation of a lot of artifical types, which are there purely to > act as the domain/range of some properties. > ]]] > > Thus I think all is good with your proposals. > > Cheers, > Niklas > > [1]: http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html > > >> kc >> >> >> On 2/8/13 3:46 PM, Owen Stephens wrote: >>> >>> OK - I've given markup a go for Proposal 5 - not done this before so >>> likely be errors/misconceptions on my part so anyone should feel free to >>> chip in and improve. >>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Object_Types#Proposal_5 >>> Owen >>> >>> Owen Stephens >>> Owen Stephens Consulting >>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com >>> Email: owen@ostephens.com >>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936 >>> >>> On 8 Feb 2013, at 18:01, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@KCOYLE.NET> wrote: >>> >>>> So many choices! :-) Should the next step be to try to encode a few items >>>> and see how it works? >>>> >>>> Also, the creativeWork "encoding" is *supposed* to be of type >>>> MediaObject. Does that make a difference? >>>> >>>> kc >>>> >>>> On 2/8/13 7:46 AM, Owen Stephens wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Karen, >>>>> >>>>> I'm inclined to ignore that definition of Media Object :) There is no >>>>> reason why an Audio-book shouldn't be embedded in a webpage so I wouldn't >>>>> want to exclude this either) >>>>> >>>>> I think you could make use of the Creative Work property "encoding" >>>>> rather than making it a type of Media Object - which allows some split of >>>>> content and carrier? (not wishing to resurrect that discussion!) >>>>> >>>>> This would allow: >>>>> >>>>> Proposal >>>>> Thing > CreativeWork > Audiobook >>>>> Thing > CreativeWork > Book > Audiobook >>>>> >>>>> New properties for audiobook type >>>>> >>>>> • readBy -- expected type: Person >>>>> >>>>> Properties likely to be used from Book >>>>> >>>>> • bookEdition (for abridgement note) >>>>> • isbn >>>>> >>>>> With a separate Media Object to be created and referenced using >>>>> 'encoding' property from CreativeWork? >>>>> >>>>> I've added as Proposal 4 >>>>> >>>>> Owen >>>>> >>>>> Owen Stephens >>>>> Owen Stephens Consulting >>>>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com >>>>> Email: owen@ostephens.com >>>>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936 >>>>> >>>>> On 8 Feb 2013, at 15:23, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I wrote up three options for audiobook: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Object_Types#AudioBook >>>>>> >>>>>> A key question here is whether we can re-use MediaObject, since it is >>>>>> defined as being media embedded in a web page. >>>>>> >>>>>> kc >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Karen Coyle >>>>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >>>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596 >>>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 >>>>>> skype: kcoylenet >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Karen Coyle >>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596 >>>> m: 1-510-435-8234 >>>> skype: kcoylenet >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Karen Coyle >> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >> ph: 1-510-540-7596 >> m: 1-510-435-8234 >> skype: kcoylenet >> > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Saturday, 9 February 2013 16:49:48 UTC