Re: schema.org proposal for extending Thing

Raj, re your second proposal, can you clarify the difference between
Thing/link, the existing Thing/url, and the object's id (microdata @itemid,
RDFa @about)? Would Thing/link serve the same purpose as the proposed
sameThingAs property <http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/ThingIdentity>?

Thanks,
Justin


On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Raj Singh <rsingh@opengeospatial.org> wrote:

> 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
>
>
>
>