Re: Vocabulary for Article

Doh !  Thanks Vicki... cleaned up the Community Examples:
https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/wiki/Examples:Opinionated-Articles-(Op-Ed
)


On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 1:34 PM Vicki Tardif <vtardif@google.com> wrote:

> There are a number of subtypes under https://schema.org/Article and
> https://schema.org/NewsArticle which would cover these cases.
>
> - Vicki
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 2:29 PM Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Niels,
>>
>> As far as Opinionated Articles, you can use
>> https://schema.org/articleSection or just use
>> https://schema.org/additionalType <https://additionalType> and do the
>> following, as many now do:
>>
>> {
>>     "@context": "http://schema.org",
>>     "@type": "Article",
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *    "articleSection": {        "sameAs":
>> "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337
>> <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337>",        "@type": "Text",
>> "name": "Opinion Editorial"    },*
>>     "author": "John Doe",
>>     "name": "How to Tie a Reef Knot"
>> }
>>
>>
>> {
>>     "@context": "http://schema.org",
>>     "@type": "Article",
>> *    "additionalType":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337
>> <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2602337>",*
>>     "author": "John Doe",
>>     "name": "How to Tie a Reef Knot"
>> }
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 1:04 PM Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We already have support for the following:
>>>
>>> A dictionary term:  https://pending.schema.org/DefinedTerm
>>> An encyclopedia entry (when referring to an entry in the context of
>>> within the pages of a book or volume form) https://schema.org/Thing or
>>> https://pending.schema.org/DefinedTerm
>>>
>>> However, as now many encyclopedia are in online form, each Online Entry (*Articles
>>> written to describe a Thing or DefinedTerm*) in an encyclopedia should
>>> be considered an Article https://schema.org/Article because that is in
>>> fact how nearly all of them treat their entries now:
>>> https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations
>>> https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/foreclosure
>>>
>>> Where each Article can have an author, alternativeHeadline, articleBody,
>>> pageStart, pageEnd, pagination, contributors, etc.
>>>
>>> But as I said earlier, if I were writing a blog or article and wanted to
>>> mention a particular entry in an book or volume form ecyclopedia, I would
>>> probably wrap that with DefinedTerm and treat the book or volume form
>>> encyclopedia as a https://schema.org/CreativeWork as well as probably a
>>> https://pending.schema.org/DefinedTermSet
>>>
>>> Hope this helps clarify a bit more,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 6:13 AM Michael Andrews <nextcontent01@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't see anything in the definition of Article to suggest an article
>>>> must be 'objective'. Entire magazines are composed of commentary, which is
>>>> perfectly fine. Article covers all types, not just 'news'.  Even the
>>>> definition of NewsArticle allows interpretative content.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018, 4:14 PM Niels <nielsl@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That is a goid question Laura. Wikipedia, and its predicesser
>>>>> nunpedia, are a very special sort of project, aiming to be a collection of
>>>>> entries by anyone who has sonething useful to add. Such thing already has a
>>>>> name. A wiki. I think it may very well be debated is a wiki page should be
>>>>> seen as an article. I personally dont think a wiki page is a type article.
>>>>>
>>>>> A normal encyclopidia has a publisher and a (number of) author(s).
>>>>> Such os much closer to an article.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hans Polak points out a newsarticle should not be confused with an
>>>>> opinated article. News is unopiniated, objective. I agree with him. The
>>>>> issue is not with calling such work an article, the issue is with the word
>>>>> news, which is these days used for pretty much anything.
>>>>>
>>>>> An article telling us that the cat whom has been stuck in a tree has
>>>>> finally been resqued is news. It tells us something new, something we did
>>>>> not know yet, as its main intent.
>>>>> An article explaining how high cats can climb and from what hight they
>>>>> can usually jump, is not news, but is backgroud.
>>>>> An article telling us that the cat was stupid to climb in such a high
>>>>> tree is not news, but is an opiniated article.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is all quite obvious, but some news agencies seem to ignor these
>>>>> distinctions, likely because news sells, and it sells better than bacground
>>>>> stories or opinions. Calling it news sells better.
>>>>> But dont let that push you away from the fact that news articles are
>>>>> objective in nature, and for now you can mark up encyclopedia entries as
>>>>> newsarticle to imply objective information.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "The fact that some newspapers taint their news coverage with their
>>>>> political preferences is lamentable, but they're not per definition
>>>>> subjective."
>>>>> They are not subjective,but they are opiniated. They are not simply
>>>>> factual reporting of events. A distinction between an objective report and
>>>>> an opiniated article should be made clear by the publisher. The vocab
>>>>> should at least accomodate the posibility of making that distinction.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope the vocab can be extended to make a seperate type available for
>>>>> wiki's.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the word news being abused, that is a debate society is finally
>>>>> about to have, now that the term fake news has come about. We will probably
>>>>> start seeing news agencies reinventing the name of the articles they sell
>>>>> to distinct themselfs from less objective compeditors. This is an issue
>>>>> much bigger than just the schema.org vocab.
>>>>>
>>>>> What we could do in schema.org is adjust the description of news
>>>>> article, to very clearly state that with newsarticle wemean an objective
>>>>> reporting of news. If it is not objective, it should be marked as opiniated
>>>>> article instead. That way it is atleast made very clear to anyone using the
>>>>> vocab that marking opinated articles as news is faulty use of the vocab.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope that helps.
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>> Niels Lancel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On August 6, 2018 11:36:02 AM GMT+02:00, Hans Polak <info@polak.es>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good morning,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd say that (ideally) newspaper articles are objective. Opinion
>>>>>> pieces are not newspaper articles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The fact that some newspapers taint their news coverage with their
>>>>>> political preferences is lamentable, but they're not per definition
>>>>>> subjective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the other hand, adding "encyclopedic entries" to the description
>>>>>> is an excellent idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06/08/18 07:31, Laura Morales wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Article" is defined as "An article, such as a news article or piece of investigative report. Newspapers and magazines have articles of many different types and this is intended to cover them all."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would this be appropriate to identify articles such as encyclopedic entries? For example a Wikipedia article? The current definition seems to suggest that an article is some kind of work with a subjective point of view, for example a newspaper or magazine article. What can I use instead to identify an article which is objective and does not contain personal opinions, for example an encyclopedia's article?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>
>>> Thad
>>> +ThadGuidry <https://plus.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>>>
>> --
>>
>> Thad
>> +ThadGuidry <https://plus.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>>
> --

Thad
+ThadGuidry <https://plus.google.com/+ThadGuidry>