RE: Proposal for “OrganicCertification” Schema in Product Listings

+1 to the direction of travel on this.

A product is likely to have multiple certifications and, in the real world, there might be multiple certifications of similar types (USDA organic, UK Soil Association Organic etc). What matters is that there is "a" cert associated with something. The details of that cert can be contained within it and the user can decide which ones they care about. This keeps the modelling as simple as possible while being completely flexible.

If you want a handy enumerated list of organic claim agencies, the GS1 Web Voc has one. See https://ref.gs1.org/voc/OrganicClaimAgencyCode which provides values for the https://ref.gs1.org/voc/organicClaimAgency property.

HTH

Phil

---

Phil Archer
Web Solutions Director, GS1
https://www.gs1.org


https://philarcher.org

+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher.bsky.social

-----Original Message-----
From: Mohith Agadi | Fact Protocol <mohith@fact.technology>
Sent: 20 November 2024 06:55
To: Micah McG <mcglabs@gmail.com>
Cc: Marie Seshat Landry <marielandryceo@gmail.com>; public-schemaorg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for “OrganicCertification” Schema in Product Listings

"If you imagine that every certification would have its own type the schema would be unnecessarily large" agreed on this.


--


Best Regards,


Mohith Agadi
Co-founder, Fact Protocol


E: mohith@fact.technology
P: +1-302-365-0606 (WhatsApp)
P: +91-9035211411
W: https://fact.technology/


Connect with me on:
Twitter <https://twitter.com/MohithAgadi/>  | LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/in/MohithAgadi/>





On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 23:55 Micah McG <mcglabs@gmail.com <mailto:mcglabs@gmail.com> > wrote:


        The schema is very flexible and imo you wouldn't need a type for organic certification.. If you imagine that every certification would have its own type the schema would be unnecessarily large as it retains flexibility to shape most use cases currently.

        Consider this example:
        {
          "@context": "https://schema.org",
          "@type": "Certification",
          "name": "Organic Certification",
          "description": "Certification ensuring compliance with organic farming and production standards.",
          "certificationIdentification": {
            "@type": "DefinedTerm",
            "name": "USDA Organic",
            "termCode": "ORG-001",
            "url": "https://example.org/usda-organic-certification"
          },
          "provider": {
            "@type": "Organization",
            "name": "Organic Standards Agency",
            "url": "https://example.org/organic-standards"
          },
          "validFrom": "2024-11-19",
          "expires": "2026-11-18",
          "url": "https://example.org/organic-certification-details"
        }

        Gives all the information necessary and moving into the age of LLMs, think they'd be able to understand the structure quite well. Try asking an LLM for examples and you can use the above example in your prompt.


        On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 12:38 PM Marie Seshat Landry <marielandryceo@gmail.com <mailto:marielandryceo@gmail.com> > wrote:


                Subject: Proposal for “OrganicCertification” Schema in Product Listings

                Dear Public Schema.org Community,

                I would like to bring attention to an important GitHub issue discussing the proposal of adding an “OrganicCertification” as a subtype under “Certifications” in the Product schema. This proposal aims to improve how search engines can identify and prioritize certified organic products, enhancing transparency and promoting eco-friendly practices.

                For more details, please review the full discussion here: GitHub Issue #4290 <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/4290> .

                Best regards,

                Marie Seshat Landry

CONFIDENTIALITY / DISCLAIMER: The contents of this e-mail are  confidential and are not to be regarded as a contractual offer or acceptance from GS1 (registered in Belgium). 
If you are not the addressee, or if this has been copied or sent to you in error, you must not use data herein for any purpose, you must delete it, and should inform the sender. 
GS1 disclaims liability for accuracy or completeness, and opinions expressed are those of the author alone. 
GS1 may monitor communications. 
Third party rights acknowledged. 
(c) 2020.

Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2024 09:34:38 UTC