- From: Anna Primpeli <anna@informatik.uni-mannheim.de>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:07:42 +0100
- To: "'Robin Berjon'" <robin@berjon.com>, "'Thad Guidry'" <thadguidry@gmail.com>, <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
Hello Thad and Robin, After having a closer look to the issue reported concerning the <http://schema.org/Thing> class it seems like websites are using it and it is not because of erroneous content or some strange behavior of the parsers. Our statistics give a list of domains per class and after navigating randomly to some URLs of the domains reported to use the Thing class, I figured out that indeed it is part of their annotated content. If you would wish to have the list of the domains reported to use <http://schema.org/Thing> annotations please let me know. We do not provide this information through the WebDataCommons website as the files are rather large. Best Regards, Anna -----Original Message----- From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin@berjon.com] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 4:26 PM To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>; public-schemaorg@w3.org <public-schemaorg@w3.org> <public-schemaorg@w3.org> Subject: Re: ANN: WebDataCommons releases 44.2 billion quads Microdata, Embedded JSON-LD, RDFa and Microformat data originating from 5.6 million pay-level-domains On 19/01/2017 10:01 , Thad Guidry wrote: > But for us and future forward... > What were the millions of schema.org/Thing <http://schema.org/Thing> > 's that folks wired up, that we don't have classes for yet ? I wondered if that wasn't just erroneous content being treated as schema:Thing when there's no type provided? -- • Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon • http://science.ai/ — intelligent science publishing •
Received on Monday, 23 January 2017 14:08:08 UTC