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

Re: publisher field for Blogposts and websites

From: Eric Franzon <eric.franzon@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:51:34 -0600
Message-ID: <CALWjsy8N6HX3_mNK5cm4ZrMEvuFnUC4pQkm7tZ1pctpfxAhXXw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at>, Bäck, Gerald <gerald@baeck.at>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
+1. In addition to small blogs, this relationship exists in large
organizations as well:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=who+is+the+publisher+of+the+New+York+Times%3F

Cheers,
--Eric


On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Broadening out the question of the possibility of a publisher being a
> Person or an Organization, to any CreativeWork, that does in this age of
> self-publishing have something [i]n its favour."
>
> +1 to this.  The requirements of specific data consumers entirely aside,
> one more than one occasion having Organization as the sole expected type
> has either struck me as limiting, or *has *been limiting.  To cite the
> most obvious use case, the publisher of a single-author blog is almost
> always the Person who is that single author, and it's limiting not to be
> able to declare that without either reverting to a text string or using an
> unexpected type.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Richard Wallis <
> richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote:
>
>> From a Schema.org vocabulary point of view no properties are deemed to be
>> required.
>>
>> In the case of the Google SDTT complaining about missing fields it is
>> advising you on *their* requirements for displaying information about
>> organisations (e.g.. asking for a logo) etc. Questions regarding the needs
>> should be addressed to their developer mailing lists.
>>
>> This list is inly for discussions regarding the vocabulary itself.
>>
>> In the particular circumstance you describe, I would probably not have
>> applied a publisher to individual BlogPostings for which an author would
>> suffice.  However I would have associated each post as being ‘partOf’ a
>> Blog which optionally would have a ‘publisher’ reference.
>>
>> Broadening out the question of the possibility of a publisher being a
>> Person or an Organization, to any CreativeWork, that does in this age of
>> self-publishing have something n its favour.
>>
>> ~Richard.
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard Wallis
>> Founder, Data Liberate
>> http://dataliberate.com
>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
>> Twitter: @rjw
>>
>> On 7 June 2016 at 11:44, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Gerald,
>>>
>>> I agree. Another solution could be to simply accept schema:Person and
>>> schema:Organization as publisher.
>>>
>>> Maybe one of the people maintaining schema.org can comment on that
>>> issue!?
>>>
>>> Best, Elias
>>>
>>>
>>> On 07.06.2016 10:59, Bäck, Gerald wrote:
>>> > Hi Elias,
>>> >
>>> > the interesting thing is, if you put a logo field into the person
>>> entity,
>>> > google validator claims that a logo field is not valid within the
>>> person
>>> > entity:) The conclusion is that persons cannot be publishers, which is
>>> > simply wrong.
>>> >
>>> > My proposal is to get rid of the publisher entity as a requirement,
>>> because
>>> > blogposts and websites still need an author which should be enough for
>>> > private run blogs.
>>> >
>>> > best wishes, Gerald
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ----
>>> > DI Gerald Bäck | fb <https://facebook.com/geraldbaeck> | blog
>>> > <http://www.baeck.at/> | devblog <http://dev.baeck.at> | fitblog
>>> > <http://fitness.baeck.at> | +43 664 5107761 <+436645107761>
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi Gerald,
>>> >>
>>> >> this is indeed a strange behaviour. I would blame it on the way
>>> Google's
>>> >> structured data testing tool works: it does, as far as i know, not
>>> >> necessarily validate/verify annotations strictly the way schema.org
>>> >> defines them, but more in a way they need the annotations for feeding
>>> >> their Rich Snippets and Rich Cards.
>>> >>
>>> >> So I would assume Google doesn't care about having a schema:Person as
>>> a
>>> >> publisher, but requires a logo (or some kind of picture) to process a
>>> >> beautiful Rich Snippet/Rich Card out of it.
>>> >>
>>> >> Best, Elias
>>> >>
>>> >> On 07.06.2016 08:36, Bäck, Gerald wrote:
>>> >>> Hi,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I am currently doing my first steps with JSON-LD and try it on my
>>> private
>>> >>> blog. As far as I understand Blogposts do require a publisher field,
>>> >> which
>>> >>> can only be an organisation. But I think it should be possible for
>>> >> persons
>>> >>> to be publishers too, but I also would like to question, that
>>> blogposts
>>> >> or
>>> >>> even Websites do need a publisher field at all.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I tested my blog with Google's Structured Data Testing Tool.
>>> >> Interestingly
>>> >>> enough the tool did not complain about the publisher being a Person,
>>> but
>>> >>> that the publisher entitiy had no logo, which on the other hand is
>>> not
>>> >>> allowed as a field for a person.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.baeck.at%2Fblog%2F2016%2F05%2F30%2FWahlmanipulationen%2F
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I also tested the root of my blog, which is defined as website, also
>>> with
>>> >>> myself as a publisher person. This time the tool was fine with it.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.baeck.at%2F
>>> >>>
>>> >>> thx, Gerald
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ----
>>> >>> DI Gerald Bäck | fb <https://facebook.com/geraldbaeck> | blog
>>> >>> <http://www.baeck.at/> | devblog <http://dev.baeck.at> | fitblog
>>> >>> <http://fitness.baeck.at> | +43 664 5107761 <+436645107761>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Elias Kärle, MSc
>>> >> Semantic Technology Institute
>>> >> University of Innsbruck
>>> >>
>>> >> ICT - Technologie Park Innsbruck
>>> >> 2nd Floor, Room 3S02
>>> >> Technikerstrasse, 21a
>>> >> 6020 Innsbruck
>>> >> Austria
>>> >>
>>> >> Tel.: (+43) 512 507 53738
>>> >> Skype: elias.kaerle
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> Elias Kärle, MSc
>>> Semantic Technology Institute
>>> University of Innsbruck
>>>
>>> ICT - Technologie Park Innsbruck
>>> 2nd Floor, Room 3S02
>>> Technikerstrasse, 21a
>>> 6020 Innsbruck
>>> Austria
>>>
>>> Tel.: (+43) 512 507 53738
>>> Skype: elias.kaerle
>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
*Eric Axel Franzon*

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ericfranzon
Twitter: http://twitter.com/EricAxel
G+: http://http://gplus.to/ericfranzon
Online Business Card: http://ericaxel.magntize.com
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2016 22:52:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:12:26 UTC