Re: Tightening up Re: schema.org/Place: replace faxNumber and telephone with contactPoint

http://schema.org/Person/Minister

could be re-written has

http://schema.org/Profession/Minister

but then again, there might be a hiphop rapper (Person) just called
"Minister". LOL.

And there lies the problem with natural language reading of fragments of
URLs.

Dan is spot on, in this argument.  Not enough information in fragments.
 Some folks just make really long fragments to avoid their own pitfall.
 But it is not a wise choice as Dan mentions.



On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> 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
>
>


-- 
-Thad
http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry