Re: Schema.org External Enumerations mechanism

Hello,

Just to be sure, you say it is not possible to express this :

 <p vocab="http://schema.org/" resource="#manu" typeof="Person
wiki:Programmer">
.

whith microdata as microdata does not support multiple types ?

It is too bad because it exactly answers the needs a) to use high level
classes inside schema.org to have a shared classification, b) to be able to
use any external vocabularies to get a more detailed or more domain
oriented description.

Cheers
Jean Delahousse

2012/4/25 Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>

> On 25 April 2012 02:17, Guha <guha@google.com> wrote:
> > After some discussion, etc., here is the next version of the proposal:
> >
> >  The canonical urls that Schema.org recommends for use will the urls for
> the
> > entities on the reference sites (wikipedia, freebase, nist, etc.) When
> these
> > reference sites add new entities (such as South Sudan as a new country),
> > webmasters can immediately start using them.
> >
> >  In addition, to make the common use case much easier, Schema.org will
> > provide documentation pages that list the entities (and their external
> > urls), along with the caveat that the external entity is the primary
> source.
> >
> >  How does this sound?
>
> I think this is heading in the right direction. I've updated
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/ExternalEnumerations accordingly,
> with links into the wiki history for the earlier draft and for this
> discussion.
>
> My update is a first-pass and there may be (conceptual or technical)
> remnants of the earlier design in there. We don't say anything about
> URLs for countries vs pages about those countries, or whether we
> expect HTML+Microdata (or RDFa, or whatever) at those URLs. I think
> some flexibility is appropriate at this stage.
>
> Daniel Dulitz notes (rightly) that the doc is currently a little
> unclear as to whether we yet handle the externally enumerated subtypes
> scenario. There are two syntax issues there: firstly that Microdata
> doesn't support multiple types, and seems unlikely to change.
> Secondly, when looking to the future and RDFa Lite usage, RDFa now
> comes "out of the box" with some prefix bindings for existing W3C
> vocabularies and for other commonly encountered general purpose RDF
> vocabularies. I have started a conversation with Ivan (cc:'d) about
> whether there might be scope to collaborate there.  This "RDFa initial
> context" list, see http://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1.html
> and background doc http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/profile/data/ was
> based on crawler stats from Yahoo and Sindice. It doesn't currently
> include "bulk" vocabularies like e.g. DBpedia, but there might be
> some scope for doing so. The syntactic benefit is that RDFa Lite's
> 'typeof' attribute can take a space-separated list of types:
>
> So a simple description looks like this (from
> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-lite/#vocab--typeof--and-property )
>
> <p vocab="http://schema.org/" resource="#manu" typeof="Person">
>   My name is <span property="name">Manu Sporny</span>
>   and you can give me a ring via
>   <span property="telephone">1-800-555-0199</span>.
>   <img property="image" src="http://manu.sporny.org/images/manu.png" />
> </p>
>
> Whereas if we wanted to say that Manu is in some other type too, eg. C
> programmer, we can drop in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmer or
> (if the prefix is declared explicitly or via the W3C 'starter list'
> just wiki:Programmer, ... or some more precise URL that means 'C
> programmer'. Ideally Microdata would allow something like this too.
>
> In RDFa then, sub-type external enumerations would be <p
> vocab="http://schema.org/" resource="#manu" typeof="Person
> wiki:Programmer"> ... how does that look?
>
> Dan
>
>


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+33 6 01 22 48 55, delahousse.jean@gmail.com, skype: jean.delahousse
@jdelahousse, http://jean-delahousse.info