Re: Integer DataType

It's a matter of individuals communicating the same idea in slightly
different ways. Every type that we're talking about in this context refers
to data, so "(Data) Type" could be considered redundant, because no one is
going to be confused that we're suddenly talking about pokemon types just
because we didn't say "data" first. It's very easy to understand the
confusion for ESL speakers since English does annoyingly use qualified and
unqualified forms of the same word to refer to *entirely* different ideas.

Saludos cordiales,
Taush Sampley

On Mon, Dec 8, 2025 at 9:59 AM Ryan Levering <rrlevering@google.com> wrote:

> Those descriptions are generated from manual strings/comments in the RDFS,
> so there is no intentional difference in those two AFAIK.  I agree that
> consistency would be good, but could see an argument for using either.
>
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2025 at 6:02 AM Andreu Sulé <andreusule@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have a question about the definition of https://schema.org/Integer .
>> Why does it say "A Schema.org Type" and not "A Schema.org DataType"? In
>> fact, Integer is a subtype of https://schema.org/Number, which does say
>> "A Schema.org Data Type".
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Andreu Sulé Duesa
>> Departament de Biblioteconomia, Documentació i Comunicació Audiovisual
>> Facultat d’Informació i Mitjans Audiovisuals. Universitat de Barcelona
>> Tel. 93 4035788
>> ORCID: 0000-0002-2467-3678 <https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2467-3678>
>> ISNI: 0000000419276461 <https://isni.org/isni/0000000419276461>
>> LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/andreu-sulé-a6bb077
>>
>