RE: Two new schema.org drafts: Civic Services, and Actions (v3)

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:47 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> Just posted,
> 
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/ActivityActions#Drafts
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/CivicServices#Draft_proposal
> 
> More on these to follow, but I wanted to share the links today.

I quickly reviewed the new draft and was a bit surprised to see that this version is just about completed actions. What's the plan (and timeframe) regarding ActionHandlers?

Last week I launched a W3C Community Group to involve more people in the development of Hydra. We haven't really started any work yet. You can join at any time at:

  http://www.w3.org/community/hydra/

Maybe we can incubate it there!?

Anyway, great to see the move away from the "sub-directory approach" to define custom actions.

There's a minor error in the  JSON-LD example on page 9. You either have to replace @vocab with @context or wrap it in a context ("@context": { "@vocab": "..." }).

Since everything else is in JSON-LD, you might also wanna use it for the RDF/XML example (which is invalid as well btw):

{
  "@context": {
    "@vocab": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "@language": "en",
    "domainOf": { "@reverse": "domain" }
  },
  "@id": "AddToQueueAction",
  "@type": "Class",
  "label": "Add To Netflix Queue",
  "comment": "The act of adding a movie to a netflix movie queue",
  "subClassOf": { "@id": "http://schema.org/AddAction" },
  "domainOf": [
    {
      "@id": "movie",
      "@type": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property",
      "label": "Movie",
      "range": { "@id": "http://schema.org/Movie" },
      "subPropertyOf": { "@id": "http://schema.org/object" }
    },
    {
      "@id": "queuePosition",
      "@type": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property",
      "label": "Queue Position",
      "subPropertyOf": { "@id": "http://schema.org/target" },
      "range": { "@id": "http://wwww.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer" }
    }
  ]
}

(using a reverse property to avoid the need for @graph at the top-level)


The rest looks good to me.


Cheers,
Markus


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Friday, 28 June 2013 11:52:09 UTC