- From: Raj Singh <rsingh@opengeospatial.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 17:03:25 -0400
- To: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
I'm developing schema.org schema for points of interest (POIs), based on a lot of work on a conceptual model [1]. I've created an initial implementation using existing schema.org vocabulary -- particularly the Place object [2]. Two things seem to be omitted from the core schema, which are key components of our POI model. First is the idea of categorization, or freeform tagging, such as is present in the Atom category element [3]. This is a concept used in the POI model, but seems incredibly useful for any type of object, and therefore I believe category should be a property of Thing. Second is the idea of related links. The concept of identifying related resources is a widespread requirement present in most information architectures. HTML has it [4]. Atom has it [5]. Semantic technology such as RDF is practically based on it. Why not schema.org? In the POI work, we adopted the IANA link relation types [6], but we weren't totally happy with those. Doesn't it seem like schema.org's Thing needs a link property? [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Data_Model [2] http://openpois.ogcnetwork.net/pois/51f2e335-781e-4651-bfe2-d54682238919 [3] http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/#category [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/struct/links.html#h-12.3 [5] http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/#link [6] http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xml --- Raj The OGC: Making location count. http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/organization/staff/rsingh
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2013 21:03:50 UTC