- From: Adrian Pohl <pohl@hbz-nrw.de>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:29:30 +0100
- To: "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Hello Karen, you are right that it probably would be best to make examples in microdata, RDFa 1.1 lite and (optionally) N3. But I have to say that I wouldn't comply myself with this. See, [1] where I created a wikipage some days ago with exemplary mappings of lobid.org descriptions of: - an edition/manifestation, - an item, - a library, - a service. I did this using N3 as this is the notation I can read/write best. And I would perhaps be willing add RDFa lite because that is what we will eventually use in lobid.org to add schema.org markup. But I wouldn't add examples in microdata as - for this specific data - this isn't a realistic use case. - Adrian [1] http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Lobid_to_schema.org >>> On 27.1.2013 at 19:03, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: > This is a request to the group that each of our proposals have examples > that conform to schema.org markup. As it says in the documentation: > > "You use the schema.org vocabulary, along with the microdata format, to > add information to your HTML content." > > I'm fine with those who wish ALSO using RDFa, but using ONLY RDFa has a > number of problems. > > First, it limits the discussion to a (possibly small) subset of the > group for whom RDFa is understood. This means that I, for one, cannot > comment intelligently on proposals that use only that format because I > don't understand it. I believe that the group loses a great deal of > subject expertise by having examples that are only understood by a few. > > Second, schema.org has a microdata format for a purpose, and that > purpose is to mark up HTML. I personally want to see proof that any > proposals coming out of this group work well in that microdata format, > and can be used with actual data. So I would like our examples to follow > the format of the schema.org examples, such as: > > BEFORE schema.org markup: > > <div> > <h1>Avatar</h1> > <span>Director: James Cameron (born August 16, 1954)</span> > <span>Science fiction</span> > <a href="../movies/avatar-theatrical-trailer.html">Trailer</a> > </div> > > AFTER schema.org markup: > > <div itemscope itemtype ="http://schema.org/Movie"> > <h1 itemprop="name"&g;Avatar</h1> > <div itemprop="director" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"> > Director: <span itemprop="name">James Cameron</span> (born <span > itemprop="birthDate">August 16, 1954)</span> > </div> > <span itemprop="genre">Science fiction</span> > <a href="../movies/avatar-theatrical-trailer.html" > itemprop="trailer">Trailer</a> > </div> > > And as much as possible, I would like us to use real data in our examples. > > Once this is done I don't care if people want to add JSON or RDFa or RDF > or any other possible serialization of this data. But I request that our > discussions focus on the example format that is understood by the > largest number of group participants. I'm assuming that is schema.org > markup of HTML -- if I'm wrong, let me know. > > Thank you, > kc
Received on Monday, 28 January 2013 09:30:33 UTC