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

Re: publisher field for Blogposts and websites

From: Elias Kaerle <elias.kaerle@sti2.at>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 12:24:41 +0200
To: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, Eric Franzon <eric.franzon@gmail.com>
Cc: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>, Bäck, Gerald <gerald@baeck.at>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <31c8d38b-01ae-e406-96e6-9d4c1ef707d8@sti2.at>
Thanks Richard,
that's great!

Best, Elias

On 08.06.2016 11:15, Richard Wallis wrote:
> After some digging I discover that this sensible proposal was accepted and
> actioned previously in version 2.1.
> 
> Somehow the change got reversed in a following release.
> 
> I have raised an issue to get this fix reinstated:
> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1198
> 
> ~Richard.
> 
> Richard Wallis
> Founder, Data Liberate
> http://dataliberate.com
> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
> Twitter: @rjw
> 
> On 7 June 2016 at 23:51, Eric Franzon <eric.franzon@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> +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
>>
> 

-- 
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
Received on Wednesday, 8 June 2016 10:25:21 UTC

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