- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 11:18:51 -0700
- To: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Cc: "<phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>" <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>, Max Froumentin <Max.Froumentin@digital.justice.gov.uk>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 4 June 2013 13:57, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote: >> 1. It says "schema.org uses the '/' character to create extensions that >> are specializations of existing schema.org vocabulary" >> Where do you use the '/' character? >> http://schema.org/Person/Engineer/ElectricalEngineer isn't a valid URI, > > > In what sense? That you can't find anything there? (As a URI it seems valid to me...) Yes. An example due to Jeni Tennison is: http://schema.org/Person/Minister ...this could plausibly be either a govt minister or a religious role. RDFa's comfort with multiple types from independent vocabularies makes it easier for such terms to be properly documented, rather than guessed from natural language reading of fragments of URLs. This seems important for many reasons including ability to include mappings, examples and multi-linguage translations. For eg: <div vocab="http://schema.org/" prefix="x: http://example.org/2013/person-extras123#" typeof="Person x:Minister"><span property="name">Joan Smith</span></div> Dan
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 18:19:18 UTC