- From: Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 17:19:18 -0500
- To: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, Chilly Bang <chilly_bang@yahoo.de>, Public Vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACfEFw8GpAqgCmKfhg=gRf6RfAAyP+D7FF8vpg9_1ernkAL0vA@mail.gmail.com>
Is this what http://schema.org/additionalType is for? -- Wes Turner On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote: > Dan's solution and Martin's link are excellent ones. Just a quick FYI a > previous discussion and a proposal related to it provide some further > information on this type of conundrum in schema.org: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/2013Jan/0182.html > http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SchemaDotOrgMetaSchema > > A fragment from the former reference: > > > Assuming they take OWL seriously, they would infer new types for the > > entity if properties were mixed and matched. If example, if the claimed > > type is schema:Book and somebody used the schema:sku property, they > > could infer it is also a schema:Product. > > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:16:01PM +0100, Chilly Bang wrote: >> >>> Hello! >>> >>> i'm busy at the moment with marking up with microdata of an online >>> bookstore and realized the following dilemma: >>> if a page is about describing and selling of a CreativeWork/Book, so i >>> come to selling properties with itemprop="offers" itemscope="" itemtype=" >>> http://schema.org/**Offer <http://schema.org/Offer>". But on this way i >>> can't describe the book i sell like Product, with product's properties - i >>> can't find any passage from CreativeWork to Product. There is in fact a >>> passage from Offer to Product, with itemprop="itemOffered" itemscope="" >>> itemtype="http://schema.org/**Product <http://schema.org/Product>", but >>> repeating isn't a good way, beside of this it isn't easy to get such >>> passage into html, even with itemref. >>> >>> I see no possibility to go the way CreativeWork->Product->Offer (or >>> CreativeWork->Product and CreativeWork->Offer), but only >>> CreativeWork->Offer, or Product->Offer. CreativeWork can't be a Product or >>> am i wrong? >>> >>> Imho CreativeWork surely can own product's properties so it must gladly >>> have a passage from any CreativeWork property to Product. >>> >> >> You can just use both types in the itemtype declaration, for example, >> itemtype="Book Product". >> >> We're doing this in the #schemabibex group to express offers for a given >> item. And Martin gave a wonderful example of this approach on this list >> just a few days back at >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-vocabs/2013Sep/**0206.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Sep/0206.html> >> >> >
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 22:19:45 UTC