- From: Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:31:32 +0100
- To: Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com>
- CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, public-vocabs@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4F17E2F4.8020303@tu-cottbus.de>
Sorry to get so directly in discussion... I believe that potential http://schema.org/Comment shoud encode the creative work by someone while http://schema.org/UserComments encodes the action event of doing a comment. In fact, the property discusses:CreativeWork of UserComments looks to confirm this view: An UserComments is an action event of an user that post a Comment (as Creative Work) referred by "discusses". Therefore I would say that introducing http://schema.org/Comment is a straight solution. In addition "discusses" may refer http://schema.org/Comment I hope it helps, - Adrian Giurca On 1/19/2012 2:31 AM, Daniel Dulitz wrote: > Thanks to both of you for getting this kicked off. > > Here are some examples of pages that I think could guide this: > > http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=32069983&postID=7424272840613555167 > <http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=32069983&postID=7424272840613555167> > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/keystone-pipeline-obama-administration_n_1213136.html > [at the bottom] > http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/01/18/f-b-i-makes-insider-trading-arrests/ > [inside the comment block inserted by Javascript] > http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/mooseisbeast3599/ > http://www.youtube.com/user/4thawt/feed > > Some of those are comments, some of those are favorites or likes, etc. > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:21, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org > <mailto:danbri@danbri.org>> wrote: > > Thanks Daniel for raising this, and Stéphane for digging out the > previous discussion. > > Let's get this fixed. I've raised an issue to track this as > https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/12 > with the summary "Comment is under UserInteractions not CreativeWork; > the former focus on aggregation". This does not capture all the > nuances but I've linked the full threads from the tracker. > > Couple of brief points for now: > > 1. Even though we don't assert that Comment is subclass of > CreativeWork, we also don't anywhere assert that no comments are > CreativeWorks. It might be there are some idioms where treating some > comments as creative works in this way is useful. > 2. Yes, Schema.org's use of plurality for class (and property) names > is unconventional. I've amended > https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/5 (which is about > plural usage in property names) to note the class situation needs > handling too. > > Can we get a couple of sample real-world pages that can guide our > decisions here? Stéphane - do you have something from Drupal 7 maybe? > > cheers, > > Dan > >
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 09:31:40 UTC