W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > January 2016

Re: Happy New Year from your friends at Wordnik

From: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:03:05 +0000
Message-ID: <CAD47Kz5xD0=qoMTPnOT3wRY70RptbcDFP89yQNCeb+5X-fzwQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
Cc: Erin McKean <erin@wordnik.com>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
Not quite.

You are right that *EnumerationValue *would be like saying a term but the
*EnumerationValueSet* would be the set of terms.

So for an example from the Urban Dictionary:

[
    {
        "@context": "http://schema.org/"
    },
    {
        "@type": "EnumerationValue",
        "@id": "
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=friendship+cuddle&defid=8683479
",
        "name”: "friendship cuddle",
        "description": "The akward cuddle between two friends who are not
trying to go to far",
        "enumerationvalueCode": "8683479"
        "partOfEnumerationValueSet": "http://www.urbandictionary.com/"
    },
    {
        "@type": "EnumerationValueSet",
        "@id": "http://www.urbandictionary.com/",
        "name”: "Urban Dictionary"
    }
]




Richard Wallis
Founder, Data Liberate
http://dataliberate.com
Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
Twitter: @rjw

On 15 January 2016 at 13:15, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:

> So EnumerationValue is like saying "term"? And EnumerationValueSet is like
> saying "code for a "definition"?
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016, 3:33 AM Richard Wallis <
> richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote:
>
>> Not a total answer but I believe that my proposal for EnumerationValue
>> would be helpful here <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/894>.
>> There is an associated pull request (#924
>> <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/pull/924>) with example etc.
>> One of the examples being a term from a legal dictionary.
>>
>> ~Richard.
>>
>>
>> Richard Wallis
>> Founder, Data Liberate
>> http://dataliberate.com
>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
>> Twitter: @rjw
>>
>> On 13 January 2016 at 02:59, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Erin !
>>>
>>> Let me also CC in the Schema.org mailing list to get you some grounding
>>> on things (and have others help out here as well).
>>>
>>> That's great news that you have at least heard about it and thinking of
>>> using Schema.org with Wordnik.com.
>>>
>>> Wordnik.com (now a non-profit) could use some Schema.org love....ideally
>>> you would use JSON-LD.  (I used Wordnik's API in the past, very cool.)
>>>
>>> Reference Schema.org mailing list thread discussing online dictionaries
>>> last year, to begin everyone's journey:
>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2015Apr/0028.html
>>>
>>> The basics I could think of for Wordnik would be uses or extension
>>> points at:
>>> https://schema.org/Thing
>>> https://schema.org/Language ??
>>>
>>> Where Thing - name is any "word" in a language, and to start we would
>>> just need to add an additional Type such as
>>>
>>> http://linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2010/LexicalItem <-- The most
>>> fitting form for Wordnik I would think and other online dictionaries ?
>>>
>>> Other helpful additional Types would be:
>>>
>>> http://linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2010/SyntacticWord
>>> http://linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2010/OrthographicWord
>>> http://linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2010/Term
>>> http://linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2010/LexicalizedConcept
>>>
>>> That's my starting help for you, I'll leave others on the list to chime
>>> in and take it from there.  I don't think a Schema.org extension for this
>>> is necessarily warranted, but it might be useful to create one, just to
>>> understand and merge those useful/needed GOLD concepts to Schema.org
>>> types/properties ... and in doing so, help other online dictionary vendors,
>>> such as Wordnik, etc.
>>>
>>> Thoughts ?
>>>
>>> Thad
>>> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Erin McKean <erin@wordnik.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks so much! I've been keeping an eye on schema.org, but I haven't
>>>> dug deep enough to see what the right markup for Wordnik would be. It looks
>>>> like this StackOverflow post has some details (
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11698336/schema-org-and-an-online-dictionary)
>>>> but any suggestions would be gratefully received!
>>>>
>>>> Yours,
>>>>
>>>> Erin
>>>> ---------------------
>>>> Erin McKean
>>>> Wordnik
>>>> @emckean/@wordnik/@wordnikapi
>>>> the Wordnik mission: every English word, available to everyone,
>>>> everywhere
>>>>
>>>> PS we're happy to send you some stickers -- just let us know where to
>>>> address the envelope!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/12/16 12:02 PM, Thad Guidry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Get Schema.org JSON-LD scripts into those public Wordnik pages so you
>>>>> can benefit from searchability !
>>>>>
>>>>> Thad
>>>>> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Received on Friday, 15 January 2016 14:03:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 15 January 2016 14:03:41 UTC