W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > May 2013

Re: Proposal: Slideset

From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 15:54:13 +0200
Cc: Barry Norton <barry.norton@ontotext.com>, public-vocabs@w3.org
Message-Id: <202261C2-CFA6-4863-AAA3-DF498DA7AC13@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Just my two cents: What may work as a starting point is to use a more abstract type from schema.org, like

    http://schema.org/CreativeWork

and then indicate the more special meaning using additionalType and www.productontology.org, e.g.

    http://www.productontology.org/id/Slide_show
or

    http://www.productontology.org/id/Presentation_slide

I admit that both are no perfect fit for the use-case under discussion, but they may be good enough to get started with using respective markup in live sites.

Full example:

(Note: There is no contradiction in the fact that www.productontology.org types are specializations of ProductOrService from GoodRelations, since anything on which any kind of rights can be obtained are instances of that type.)

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"/>
    <title>A presentation slide</title>
</head>
<body>
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/CreativeWork" itemid="#slide01">
    <link itemprop="additionalType" href="http://www.productontology.org/id/Presentation_slide" />
    <span itemprop="name">.. a short name for the slide ...</span>
    Slide description: 
    <span itemprop="description">... a longer description ...</span>

... other schema.org properties go here ...
</div>
</body>
</html>


The idea of www.productontology.org is two-fold: First, it aims at covering the specificity of the long-tail of types in knowledge representation. Second, it is meant as an incubator for collecting interest in often needed yet missing types in Web vocabularies. I.e., the natural action of the schema.org maintainers (or the maintainers of any other Web vocabulary) to a very popular type from the www.productontology.org namespace would be to add a respective type to the official "mainstream" vocabulary.

Martin


On May 8, 2013, at 10:36 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:

> On 8 May 2013 16:37, Barry Norton <barry.norton@ontotext.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I'd like to propose a new subclass of CreativeWork for slidesets.
>> 
>> As background, I'm currently encoding Slideshare views, as part of the
>> EUCLID Project (euclid-project.eu) public monitoring application.
>> 
>> I've seen that one can attach interactionCount to CreativeWork - although
>> it's a shame that this is direct, not an event in itself (and I don't have
>> the data to track each view), I was thinking of encoding each poll of the
>> Slideshare API in its own named graph and using the latest such to surface a
>> 'current count' through RDFa.
>> 
>> Comments?
> 
> Seems useful to me. Well there's two parts; indicating that something
> is a kind of container for a set of slides, and then the more social
> Web analytics piece for talking about view counts. I don't view our
> UserInteraction vocabulary as something we should be building on right
> now, but gathering requirements for improving it is certainly useful.
> 
> As for saying "this is a slideshow page", the closest we have to date
> is http://schema.org/ImageGallery ... is this similar?
> 
> Dan
> 

--------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp 
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
=================================================================
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 13:54:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:27 UTC