- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:30:42 +0200
- To: jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com>
- Cc: Guha <guha@google.com>, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, public-vocabs@w3.org, Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com>, ivan@w3.org
On 25 April 2012 16:04, jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. That's my understanding, e.g. per http://openspring.net/blog/2011/06/10/microdata-multiple-vocabularies and http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/161 (these also show some hacks and partially usable approaches, e.g. using properties called 'type' or itemref, but also why this is a hard problem given microdata's current design) Dan
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2012 14:31:16 UTC