Re: Suggestion for Describing Technical Documents Under Schema.org

Hi Keith,

This seems like a useful idea and would like to see more detail on the
proposal.

At this early stage I would highlight that some of the Type names (Concept,
Reference, Task) are very generic words that may well have conflicting
meanings in domains other than technical documentation so might benefit
from being changed to something like ConceptDocument, etc.  This may also
be true for properties when you get more into detail.

~Richard.



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

On 12 July 2017 at 17:02, Keith Schengili-Roberts <
keith.roberts@ixiasoft.com> wrote:

> I have been lurking and learning in this forum for some time, and I would
> like to propose a schema.org structure to describe technical
> documentation content. My background is in DITA structured content, which
> comes in five distinct topic types: concept, reference, task,
> troubleshooting and glossentry (glossary entry). These topic types and
> their variants are defined in the OASIS DITA specification at:
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/dita/v1.3/os/part2-tech-content/archSpec/
> technicalContent/dita-technicalContent-InformationTypes.html#dita_
> technicalContent_InformationTypes.
>
>
>
> There is already a hierarchy in schema.org for TechArticle, which
> currently only contains APIReference. I suggest adding to this hierarchy
> new child elements that match the names of the existing DITA topic types,
> which would give us:
>
>
>
> - CreativeWork
>
>    - Article
>
>       - TechArticle
>
>          - APIReference
>
>          - Concept
>
>          - GlossEntry
>
>          - Reference
>
>          - Task
>
>          - Troubleshooting
>
>
> There is already a well-defined specification for these topic types, so it
> ought to be relatively straightforward to define the properties for each
> element in the hierarchy. And while I am coming from a DITA perspective,
> there is  technical writers creating non-structured content could also use
> these elements.
>
>
> Am hoping for some good discussion on this. Ideally I would like to
> outline possible properties for each element, and then leave the tool
> vendors to figure out how to output the appropriate Schema.org element
> values.
>
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> -
>
> *Keith Schengili-Roberts*
> Market Researcher and DITA Evangelist
> Chair of the OASIS DITA Adoption Committee
>
> *IXIASOFT *
> 825 Querbes, Suite 200, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2V 3X1
> tel  + 1 514 279-4942 <%2B%201%20514%20279-4942>  /  toll free + 1 877
> 279-4942
> robertsk@ixiasoft.com  /  www.ixiasoft.com
> <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/FZsS83gArhohhoh76zBN4TsSCztdBNV5xMSCztdBNVZUsrjhKCOUYyMedETo7n79EzCjpkDYqJxUa9RDVWN-SZ3oG_jBPpeI_fmfSTEr5nWsKrus7fnjovW_8TuKyqeuLsKCONvAQm4T6emKDp55mVEVvVkffGhBrwqrhdECXYDuZXTLuZPtPo0agvbqltDO-6P_QDO7GOfBk5i3VriHI-ndFEKc8L6MQ1wQg60MbwAQg1eDNd40Bm3LN-5Ld40Qp-4Ph07vfp7QdIL6Y11Q5gJZM7na>
>
>
>