- From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 16:49:17 -0500
- To: "Muri, Allison" <allison.muri@usask.ca>
- Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, Anthony Moretti <anthony.moretti@gmail.com>, Simon Cox <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAChbWaO_=4L_6k93D-OpXLdAgjXUips-n+HxXohZGbF7yc5uBw@mail.gmail.com>
Allison, 1. "Thanks for being a great English Teacher". We need more! 2. Forget English around here, it will help, honestly for now :-) If I sound cruel, bare with me, please, because I mean no harm or insult to you at all. In fact, I do want to help you, but in order to do so, I need more information from you. Instead, begin thinking about "organizing file folders and papers". So you have a huge file folder to organize and bring some structure and understanding to. You have those bits and bobs that you were trying to apply Schema.org to. You did not explain yet this imaginary "file folder" or use case that your trying to organize. I asked you for use cases earlier and you skipped answering it in your last reply and instead began talking about a proposed type "HistoricalSignificant". I could care less what we call it..."crapBag", doesn't matter at this point :) What I sincerely care about is what kind of DATA will be captured underneath it. So, let's address your real questions. Continue to give us data that you have trouble fitting into existing Schema.org and we will provide a way to do so, AND if we can't, THEN we can talk about any "crapBag" new type. :) Again, I mean no offense, and I truly just want you to be able to use Schema.org and learn how to appropriately use it and then we can see where problems might lie in Schema.org. SO, let's begin. Earlier you mentioned about : An essay concerning pestilential contagion, by John Davis (1748) and you wanted to know about how to say that this CreativeWork is about "pestilence". Here's how: { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "CreativeWork", "name": "An essay concerning pestilential contagion ", "author": { "name": "John Davis", "sameAs": "????? no idea" }, "about": { "name": "pestilence", "sameAs" : "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q18123741" }, "subjectOf": "Historical English Diseases", "dateCreated": "1748" } OK, what other use cases do you need help in applying Schema.org ? Let me know, -Thad On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:13 PM Muri, Allison <allison.muri@usask.ca> wrote: > Hi Thad, > > It really all depends what the Type is intended to be. > > *significant* as a noun means “a thing which expresses or conveys > meaning; a sign, a symbol, an indication.” I *think* what people seem to > be intending is the adjective “sufficiently great or important to be worthy > of attention; noteworthy; consequential, influential.” > > *entity* means “a thing with distinct and independent existence” or > “something that has a real existence; an ens n., as distinguished from a > mere function, attribute, relation, etc.” [an ens is “something which has > existence; a ‘being’, entity, as opposed to an attribute, quality, etc.”]. > > HistoricalSignificant, to me, would suggest that either: > > a. this thing is really quite important to history (a war but not a > housekeeper’s commonplace book)—so the application of this would be > somewhat narrowly defined; or > > b. this thing has been deemed by someone to be important enough to mark up > as historically significant. That’s okay, but as I said before, simply > marking it up as historical-something-or-other means someone has decided > it’s significant (so why put the word *significant* in at all?) To me, > that would be like having to say SignificantEvent instead of just Event. > > > My thinking was that HistoricalEntity (or some other type meaning > HistoricalThing) would be readily understood to be broadly applicable. > > I realize of course that I am being somewhat presumptuous, strolling in > here and debating this with people who have spent years working on > schema.org! (I have been using it ever since it first appeared, so I > guess that is my main claim to authority—for what it’s worth!). It just > seems that: > > a. a Thing should be a noun (whereas I suppose a property could be > something like historicallySignificant); and > > b. a Type should be as broadly useful as possible > > > Cheers, > Allison > > On Jun 18, 2018, at 11:42 AM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote: > > Allison, > > Does it help to think this way ? > > *A Significant* - some Thing of importance to someone or some group. > A Significant Other - some Person of importance to another Person. > > Historical*Significant* - some Thing that has *historical* importance to > someone or some group. > > -Thad > > > .................................................... > Allison Muri > Department of English > > Arts 418 > University of Saskatchewan > Saskatoon, SK, Canada > ph: 306.966.5503 <(306)%20966-5503> > >
Received on Monday, 18 June 2018 22:17:10 UTC