W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > May 2017

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

From: Chaals is Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 11:26:04 +0200
To: public-schemaorg@w3.org
Message-ID: <2c8a0c24-74ed-a7b5-8f6c-1a00d0f741ef@yandex-team.ru>
Yup.

cheers


On 09/05/17 10:47, Hans Polak wrote:
> 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>
>>
>>
>

-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile   -   standards   -   Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2017 09:26:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:12:35 UTC