- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:44:43 +0200
- To: Kenley Lamaute <kenleyl@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Hi Kenley, Where are with this, from your perspective? I like the idea of using 'about', primarily because the 'current' in 'currentProduct' leaves me worrying about stale data. Many sites begin their life database-backed but then end up 'pickled'/'frozen' for various reasons (e.g. they're PHP generated and then security holes lead to the dynamic generation being replaced with a one-time snapshot). Can you suggest a final issue list for getting these changes added? Many thanks, Dan On 16 June 2012 08:03, Kenley Lamaute <kenleyl@microsoft.com> wrote: > · aboutProduct and currentProduct warrants further discussion. You > bring up a good point on simplifying the description, and we may be able to > simplify the proposal even more by simply using ‘about’ to refer to the > ‘Product’ item. > > The scenario for aboutProduct and currentProduct: > > It is very common for steps in technical documentation to vary between > product versions, and multiple supported versions of a product often exists > in a marketplace concurrently. > As a product matures the content for that product version accumulates links > / popularity. This becomes a problem when a new product releases to the > marketplace and customers search for information on implementing the new > product. Often times newer content is often difficult to find because it > must compete with legacy content which overwhelmingly appears first in > search results. > > The purpose of aboutProduct and currentProduct is to help search engines > disambiguate between product versions, and offer newer content for the > product when appropriate. > > > > With this in mind, instead of using aboutProduct and currentProduct , a more > elegant solution may be to refer to the ‘Product’ item using the ‘about’ > property that we inherit from CreativeWork. > > > > Example: > > > > Here 'about' describes the Product and version pertaining to the content; as > well as, version of the most recent shipping product: > > > > <div itemprop="about" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Product"> > > <p> > > <strong>Applies to:</strong> > > <span itemprop="name">Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2</span> > > </p> > > <meta itemprop="model" content="2008 R2"/> > > <meta itemprop="currentModel" content="2012"/> > > </div> > > > > Here 'about' also informs where to get more information on the overall > concept: > > > > <span itemprop="about" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/CreativeWork"> > > <meta itemprop="name" content="Database management System"/> > > <meta itemprop="url" content="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dbms"/> > > </span> > > > > Interested in the communities thoughts on this. I’ll kick-off a separate > thread to get input from the community on adding “currentModel” property to > Product. > > > > · Re: External enumeration: I concur, that using the method > described in the External Enumeration proposal could work as well. I expect > that search engines would support both. > > > > All the best, > > Kenley > >
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2012 12:45:16 UTC