- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 00:05:31 +0400
- To: "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
- Cc: "Vicki Tardif Holland" <vtardif@google.com>
Hi all, I'd really like to get this wrapped up and into schema.org - in my case because we would really like to have it for accessibility, but also because I think it's generally useful. So my general comment on http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Schema_CreativeWork_Relationships is that we still have too many types, whose semantics are not sufficiently distinct to survive contact with "the enemy"^W^W normal webmasters trying to use them… To be specific: -Inverse Properties I'd prefer not to have inverse properties for everything. They make schema.org twice as big, and make translation complicated. But that's a schema-wide problem. If anyone has a sense of how to deal with it that would be welcome. RDFa and JSON-LD can handle inverses, but microdata cannot easily. There are complex ways to structure microdata using itemref, but they will destroy the original goal of making it easy to write stuff, then mark up its semantics as needed because they make heavy requiremnts on the way things are written to start with. An alternative is to mint a general rev- prefix, or -inv suffix, or something, but that isn't obviously attractive either. -WorkExample / exampleOfWork vs Format* These seem to me mostly the same thing. There are already media types for works, so if it matters it seems that the format can be derived - and if it isn't obvious why it matters then it isn't clear to me whether the difference is obvious to someone trying to mark it up. -BasedOn/Adaptation/Version These seem redundant. One clue is the current description of isVersionOf says "adaptation" in its description. Is West Side Story a version or adaptation of Romeo and Juliet? I suggest collapsing these two categories. -Translation These seem straightforward. But I think it would make sense to explicitly say that they are in a different language. One of the "false friends" that catches russian speakers is that "translation" means a broadcast - and while they probably pick the difference more often reading than writing, it would be helpful to clarify. -isRepresentationOf I can't understand how this is distinctive. If I take a photo of a sculpture I see in the park, would I mark it as a Representation, or exampleOf…? What do we lose if we drop this property? It seems to me that doing so would mean we gain in reducing the complication of some people choosing one and some people choosing another. Thoughts, brickbats, requests for the phone number of my boss? cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2014 20:06:07 UTC