- From: Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 07:33:12 -0700
- To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- Cc: Tallyfy <hello@tallyfy.com>, PublicVocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>, Sam Goto <goto@google.com>
- Message-ID: <CAEiKvUAU_7XzmvP8UOT_K9aXGFNnOxOGqHdQP8AT1ZD9UGqYpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Yipes. I thought this thread was just about understanding "howto" content pages in a structured way. Process modeling is a rat hole and way out of scope, IMO. On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 4:17 AM, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org > wrote: > > On Sep 9, 2013, at 1:00 PM, Tallyfy wrote: > > > Are Wil and Jan members of this list? > > > I don't know, but I don't think so. > > > Without prejudice to some work here that may result in a simple and > web-friendly spec, I think some organisation to reach the goal of defining > explicit control flow would be highly rewarding - since it would represent > a necessary evolution beyond machine-understandable markup and entities. > How entities are a constituent of higher level goals and processes is > probably the real answer to better search. If not search, they would be a > very interesting in terms of knowledge discovery - such as being to ask > 'What happens at the Chile embassy [location]?' in Sam's example, to use > just one permutation of many possible questions. Bringing all this to a > scale such as the web would be very exciting. > > > > We at Tallyfy can help to define and implement Process markup, but we > are one of many others. Is there a way that a project with some > organisation can be spawned from this discussion? > > > > Thanks, > > Amit > > > > On 9 Sep 2013, at 11:33, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> > wrote: > > > >> All: > >> If you really want to embark into process modeling in schema.org, then > you should first become clear about > >> > >> - whether you want to model processes in procedural fashion (explicit > control flow) or a declarative fashion (modeling a set of actions and their > pre- and post-conditions), and > >> - whether the process models should be executable by a computer or > merely documents for human consumption. > >> > >> Hundreds of researchers have worked on understanding how processes can > be modeled in the context of information systems, and the least one can say > is that > >> > >> 1. it is hard and > >> 2. quick, simple approaches don't work or don't scale or both. > >> > >> See e.g. > >> > >> > http://www2.informatik.hu-berlin.de/top/download/publications/fahlandlmrwwz_2009_emmsad.pdf > >> > >> for a brief overview. > >> > >> Without excluding others, I think it would make a lot of sense to > involve > >> > >> Wil van der Aalst, http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/~wvdaalst/ > >> and > >> > >> Jan Mendling, http://www.wu.ac.at/infobiz/team/mendling > >> > >> in any such draft. They both spent years of their lives into > understanding the challenges of process modeling... > >> > >> > >> Martin > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sep 6, 2013, at 10:04 PM, Vicki Tardif Holland wrote: > >> > >>> I think a combination of Jason's suggestion of > http://schema.org/ItemList and something similar to > http://schema.org/Recipe would do the trick. The key difference is that > you probably want to specify the step number instead of relying on page > layout as parsers often discard the order of elements. > >>> > >>> Vicki > >>> > >>> Vicki Tardif Holland | Metadata Analyst | vtardif@google.com | > 978-613-9630 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Tallyfy <hello@tallyfy.com> wrote: > >>> "Process" sounds very promising as a purely top-level construct, > because any serial process (not related to a "thing" but maybe with > embedded references to things) can be wrapped and labelled as an actionable > container. http://schema.org/Recipe is the same concept as this, but only > relates to food recipes. > >>> > >>> We subscribe the Gates quote - "the future of search is verbs" and > interpret it as machines able to understand not just content, but processes > like "How to get a Chile tourist visa for British citizens" - an ordered > list of steps. Rankings for processes are also different to content > backlinks, which we are working on, as you could define pre-requisites (do > this before doing this) and chain processes after (after doing this - > continue with this). > >>> > >>> Could somebody help me propose this as a new item? I have no idea > where to start. > >>> > >>> thanks > >>> Amit > >>> http://tallyfy.com > >>> On Thursday, 5 September 2013 at 17:36, Sam Goto wrote: > >>> > >>>> Maybe an ItemList (or a specialized subclass, e.g. > http://schema.org/Process) of http://schema.org/Action and its subclasses? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Tallyfy <hello@tallyfy.com> wrote: > >>>>> The list may not be about a specific thing, but a process - which > could include many things. For example - the list, "How to enjoy a great > Saturday night in" might have a reference to a food - pizza AND a movie - > as an entity, etc. Granted, the example isn't the best, but it's entirely > unrelated to any specific thing. > >>>>> > >>>>> In the composite scenario (which might not even have any linked > entities) - I guess there might not even be a thing here at all, it's quite > specifically a set of steps with an objective. For example "What to look > out for when buying a house in London" > >>>>> > >>>>> So to clarify, this isn't to enumerate objects or things into a > determined order like "Top 10" - it's to define actionable things as steps > - whether or not there's related entities. > >>>>> > >>>>> A > >>>>> On Thursday, 5 September 2013 at 17:24, Jason Douglas wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Maybe a new subclass of ItemList? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Aside: seems like ItemListElement should have a range of Thing so > you could do structured lists (movies, steps, etc.). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -jason > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Tallyfy <hello@tallyfy.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi everyone, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I run a startup called http://tallyfy.com > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> We've just been enrolled into StartupChile, and aim to launch > within a few months using their help. Our homepage looks something like > this: > >>>>>>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14563542/tallyfy.png > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> What we do is allow anyone to embed knowledge as steps in a > checklist or a process. Examples might be: > >>>>>>> • How to bake a carrot cake > >>>>>>> • How to change a bicycle tyre > >>>>>>> • What to pack if you're visiting the Amazon rainforest > >>>>>>> • My bucket list > >>>>>>> The clearest and most obvious point to make here is that these > checklists, when marked up via schema.org would be excellent ways to > present answers to questions without people going through many pages on > search engines. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> So I wanted to propose a schema for marking up a checklist (or a > process).. If there is one already - could someone point me to it? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If we could understand that this is a "set of steps for doing > something" - I think that would be very valuable, not just to search but > for people looking for knowledge which is actionable, not just web pages. > In other words, an actual set of steps marked up is more valuable than a > block of content (usually using <ol> or <ul> HTML) which blends into a web > page. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> We intend to do a lot more - you can measure how many people did a > checklist, how long it took on average, reviews, etc. so perhaps those > could incorporate into this schema. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> thanks > >>>>>>> Amit > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------- > >> 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/ > >> > >> > >> > > -------------------------------------------------------- > 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 Monday, 9 September 2013 14:33:41 UTC