- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 18:30:30 +0000
- To: "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAK-qy=4i8N3yMEyhV_7uyEYaa5zMHfkGo2nZv3=EZbYh9UWJ0A@mail.gmail.com>
A quick note to let folk here know of recent improvements to Google's Structured Data Testing Too <https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool>l. Some of you have been asking for this ... for a while. The tool now allows multiple independent types to be applied to a single entity without errors/warnings. For example, Book and Product are defined as independent branches of the schema.org type hierarchy. And yet it is sometimes appealing to combine "book-ish" and "product-ish" properties on a single item / entity, i.e. sometimes a thing can be both at once. e.g. like this, { "@context": "http://schema.org/", "@type": ["Product", "Book"], "name": "books can be products!", "gtin13": "1234", "isbn": "5678" } Previously this kind of structure made the Google testing tool complain needlessly. The final part of the fix for this recently went live, so you should now see a more sensible response <https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool?url=https://gist.githubusercontent.com/danbri/10bcf62cba95a0a20a30ee8a78246774/raw/45e0dde4b681963e442be44cfd1d725e7726f6c9/gistfile1.txt#url=https%3A%2F%2Fgist.githubusercontent.com%2Fdanbri%2F10bcf62cba95a0a20a30ee8a78246774%2Fraw%2F45e0dde4b681963e442be44cfd1d725e7726f6c9%2Fgistfile1.txt> to this sort of markup, which now includes a simple "/"-separated list of the types that were found. And less complaining. Here's a Microdata example, <div itemscope itemtype="https://schema.org/Book https://schema.org/Product "> <span itemprop="name">books can be products!</span> <span itemprop="gtin13">1234</span> <span itemprop="isbn">5678</span> </div> And RDFa 1.1, <div vocab="https://schema.org" typeof="Product Book"> <span property="name">books can be products!</span> <span property="gtin13">1234</span> <span property="isbn">5678</span> </div> As schema.org's vocabulary has grown, the possibility to mix together pieces of complementary vocabulary like this is increasingly useful. I hope the conformance section of the schema.org site - see http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html - makes clear that this flavour of schema.org description is very much in the spirit of the project... cheers, Dan ps. only loosely related, but I was recently asked about combining RDFa and Microdata within the same section of markup. It can be done, although probably always a bad idea: https://twitter.com/danbri/status/827492508426964994 pps. this notion of multiple-types shouldn't be confused with a related situation, which is where schema.org itself says that *all* members of some type are always members of multiple supertypes. We don't do this often, but for example we say that anything which is a LocalBusiness is going to also be both an Organization and a Place. The approach I'm talking about today is about allowing anyone to mix together types when it seems sensible / appropriate, without the combination being explicitly anticipated by the schema.org project.
Received on Friday, 3 February 2017 18:31:04 UTC