Re: Does WaPo Fact Checker get the semantics of schema.org's ClaimReview wrong?

Excellent analysis. +1

On 05/09/2017 06:33 AM, Michael Andrews wrote:
> I see a usability issue with how Rating http://schema.org/Rating is 
> applied to ClaimReview.  On one hand, publishers should invert their 
> scales when their own numeric systems indicate the worst rating as 
> having the highest numeric value, IF the goal is for the value to be 
> evaluated by an algorithm, say by a search engine, to assess the 
> claim.  In this case, the value is considered a number (integer) 
> value, so that all numbers need to be consistent for an algorithm to 
> compare them.  On the other hand, the publisher has their own rating 
> system that may involve numeric values that are understood by 
> audiences in a certain way (more Pinocchios are worse, not better).  
> If the rating value were inverted, but displayed to audiences in a 
> snippet, then people would draw an incorrect conclusion about what the 
> rating represented.  In this case, the rating value is actually a text 
> value, not a number value.
>
> Another point of confusion comes from the definitions of bestRating as 
> the "highest value" implying it will be high number.  Not all rating 
> systems work that way.  It would be better to keep the original values 
> the publishers use, but clarify the scale by saying bestRating as 
> "most favorable" rather than highest.  Ultimately, I think there needs 
> to be two separate rating values, a text value that is seen by 
> audiences, and a numeric value that machine readable.
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Tim Finin <finin@umbc.edu 
> <mailto:finin@umbc.edu>> wrote:
>
>     I just checked a few recent politifact items and they do indeed
>     have the scale inverted.  :-(
>
>     On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com
>     <mailto:aaranged@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         I haven't re-checked since I tweeted this on 11 April, but at
>         that time PolitiFact seemed also was using a scale that was
>         the inverse of the schema's specs:
>         https://twitter.com/aaranged/status/851902710307737600
>         <https://twitter.com/aaranged/status/851902710307737600>
>
>