Re: Marking micro-blogging status messages?


Raising this again as I haven't seen reactions one way or the other.

I see that Will Norris asked a similar question shortly after my first email:
 - how would folks recommend representing a short textual creative work like
a twitter post?  CreativeWork doesn't seem to have a place to put the body
of the post, so would that then require the use of Article (so you can use
articleBody)?  I guess for something like a tweet, you could potentially
put the full message into the description of a generic CreativeWork, but
that doesn't seem to work as well for longer posts like Google+ supports.
 By the way, is there a general rule of thumb that folks are using for the
maximum length  a description value should be.

Should I go ahead and document in a slightly more formalized way what
I described below to represent micro-blogging messages? Or do you
believe that the problem is already solved using existing classes?


2012/2/22 François Daoust <>:
> Hi,
> I don't think the topic has been raised before on the mailing-list.
> Apologies if that has already been addressed.
> What is the best way to mark a micro-blogging messages à la Twitter,
> or any other SMS-like status message?
> Looking at, 'Article' (or a sub-type of 'Article') seems
> the closest thing to represent such a message but, depending on how
> you see it, you might say that a status message is:
> 1. an Article with an articleBody and no name
> 2. an Article with a name and no articleBody
> In both cases, the type is too generic to carry the nature of the
> message. Would it make sense to add a sub-type 'Status' to 'Article'
> and clarify how such messages are to be represented? Or is there
> another vocabulary that should be used?
> Thanks,
> Francois.

Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2012 17:13:18 UTC