Re: Semantically marking up a "checklist" or process

I'm not following why adding "next" and "prev" to Thing is better than
adding "position"?  They both seem equally problematic semantically, yet
the former offers less convenience than the latter... and also interferes
with the recommended use of itemid as a canonical URL.


On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl>wrote:

> Now maybe I'm a bit naive but I can't help thinking about the mechanism
> that exist in HTML to create order, namely rel="next" and rel="prev".
>
> Could we maybe do something with mark up like this:
>
> <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ItemList">
>   <h2 itemprop="name">Most popular products</h2>
>
>   <ol>
>     <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemid="product-1" itemscope itemtype="
> http://schema.org/Product">
>       <link itemprop="next" href="product-2">
>
>       <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>         <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>       </a>
>     </li>
>
>     <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemid="product-2" itemscope itemtype="
> http://schema.org/Product">
>       <link itemprop="prev" href="product-1">
>       <link itemprop="next" href="product-3">
>
>       <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>         <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>       </a>
>     </li>
>
>     <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemid="product-2" itemscope itemtype="
> http://schema.org/Product">
>       <link itemprop="prev" href="product-2">
>
>       <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>         <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>       </a>
>     </li>
>   </ol>
> </div>
>
> Here we have a <link> element and 2 new properties for 'Thing' (Product):
> 'next' & 'prev' (or whichever labels would be more preferable) which by
> means of the href could be linked to the corresponding 'itemid'.
>
> Would thist be a viable line of thought?
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl>wrote:
>
>> I have spend some time reading the sources provided by Martin and after
>> thinking his proposition through I come the to the conclusion his
>> proposition just isn't quite there yet, since the creation of the new type
>> 'ListItem' still doesn't fix the issue that Things can't be linked to
>> itemListElements.
>>
>> To compensate this Martin suggests that, with the addition of the
>> 'ListItem' type, declaration of an additionalType could resolve this.
>> Now correct if I'm wrong here, but isn't the 'additionalType' property
>> typically used to declare a (more specific) type from a different
>> vocabulary instead of declaring a second schema.org type?
>>
>> Next to that, If I interpretate his proposition correctly and make an
>> HTML example, I come to something like this:
>> (sorry for doing it in Microdata, I'm not to comfortable with RDFa still)
>>
>> <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ItemList">
>>   <h2 itemprop="name">Most popular products</h2>
>>
>>   <ol>
>>     <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemscope itemtype="
>> http://schema.org/ListItem" additionalType="http://schema.org/Product">
>>       <meta itemprop="itemPostion" content="1">
>>
>>       <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>>         <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>>       </a>
>>     </li>
>>
>>     <li itemprop="itemListElement" itemscope itemtype="
>> http://schema.org/ListItem" additionalType="http://schema.org/Product">
>>       <meta itemprop="itemPostion" content="2">
>>
>>       <a itemprop="url" href="http://example.org/producturl">
>>         <span itemprop="name">ProductName</span>
>>       </a>
>>     </li>
>>
>>     <!-- etc, etc -->
>>   </ol>
>> </div>
>>
>> Doing it this way would falsely give the 'Product' the 'itemPosition'
>> property as well, entering a whole new area of problems.
>>
>> Now Martin also said: "... whether the expected range for
>> itemListElement could be broadened to schema:Thing. From the top of my
>> head, I would oppose that, for the simple reason that the property
>> itemPosition would then have to be added to Thing, which is confusing."
>>
>> Here I have to agree that adding 'itemPosition' to 'Thing' would be
>> confusing indeed but maybe we should keep thinking in this direction
>> nonetheless. Apparently we're missing a proper way to add 'order' to
>> schema.org. This doesn't only count for an ItemList but for example also
>> faults in being able to declare the order of a series of WebPages (book) or
>> images (IKEA manual), etc.
>>
>> If we can come up with a proper manner to declare the order of Things,
>> this could be very applicable in a lot other situations as well. And in
>> case of an itemListElement it would make it possible to have it's range
>> contain a Thing.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Martin Hepp <
>> martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
>>
>>> So in short, if it is okay for you to collate the entity and the list
>>> item for the entity, we can simply work with a multi-typed HTML element and
>>> save one additional property. If you want to be able to model the entity
>>> independently of the list item and have a formal link between both, we need
>>> an additional property. But then this should maybe be a generic property
>>> for linking entities and their representation (maybe from the library
>>> extension, did not check), and we are also in the middle of philosophical
>>> distinctions that are, while valuable, difficult to teach to broad
>>> audiences ;-)
>>>
>>> I am for simply collating them and using a single multi-typed entity.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> On Sep 10, 2013, at 4:48 PM, Justin Boyan wrote:
>>>
>>> > Martin,
>>> >
>>> > Wouldn't the ListItem also need a second property, call it "item",
>>> with a range of Thing? Otherwise how would we mark up a list of
>>> Restaurants, a list of Universities, etc.?
>>> >
>>> > Justin
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Hi Dan, Guha:
>>> >
>>> > Attached, please find the proposal in the RDFa format necessary for
>>> inclusion in schema.org.
>>> >
>>> > Martin
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > <!-- ========================== -->
>>> > <!-- CHANGES TO EXISTING ELEMENTS -->
>>> > <!-- ========================== -->
>>> >
>>> > <!-- New range
>>> > <div typeof="rdf:Property" about="http://schema.org/itemListElement">
>>> >         <span>Domain: <a property="http://schema.org/domain" href="
>>> http://schema.org/ItemList">ItemList</a></span>
>>> >         <span>Range: <a property="http://schema.org/range" href="
>>> http://schema.org/ListItem">ListItem</a></span>
>>> >         <span>Range: <a property="http://schema.org/range" href="
>>> http://schema.org/Text">Text</a></span>
>>> >         ItemList
>>> > </div>
>>> >
>>> > <!-- ========================== -->
>>> > <!-- ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS -->
>>> > <!-- ========================== -->
>>> >
>>> > <div typeof="rdfs:Class" about="http://schema.org/ListItem">
>>> >         <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">ListItem</span>
>>> >         <span property="rdfs:comment">An list item, e.g. a step in a
>>> checklist or how-to description.</span>
>>> >         <span>Subclass of: <a property="rdfs:subClassOf" href="
>>> http://schema.org/StructuredValue">StructuredValue</a></span>
>>> > </div>
>>> >
>>> > <div typeof="rdf:Property" about="http://schema.org/itemPosition">
>>> >         <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">itemPosition</span>
>>> >         <span property="rdfs:comment">The position of the item in an
>>> ordered list (1 = first, 2 = second, ...).</span>
>>> >         <span>Domain: <a property="http://schema.org/domain" href="
>>> http://schema.org/ListItem">ListItem</a></span>
>>> >         <span>Range: <a property="http://schema.org/range" href="
>>> http://schema.org/Number">Number</a></span>
>>> > </div>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sep 10, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Martin Hepp wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi Jarno:
>>> > >
>>> > >>> Now if the expected value of an itemListElement could also be a
>>> Thing, wouldn't both the order (of the output array) and the Things it's
>>> about be preserved?
>>> > >
>>> > > In fact, that includes the interesting question whether the expected
>>> range for itemListElement could be broadened to schema:Thing.
>>> > > From the top of my head, I would oppose that, for the simple reason
>>> that the property itemPosition would then have to be added to Thing, which
>>> is confusing.
>>> > > Second, if you want to type the ListItem further, you could simply
>>> use a secondary type via basic RDFa patterns or the additionalType property.
>>> > >
>>> > > As for the order:
>>> > > Implicitly, the order of the elements from the HTML tree would be
>>> accessible. But at least in RDFa syntax that is not preserved when the data
>>> is extracted.
>>> > > Also, it is possible that the ordering in the list differs from the
>>> intended conceptual ordering.
>>> > >
>>> > > So again, I think that with as little as one new type, one range
>>> change, and one additional property we could get this issue done.
>>> > >
>>> > > Martin
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Sep 10, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Jarno van Driel wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Correction: I should have mentioned:
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Jun/0042.html The
>>> other example contain formatting errors.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Jarno van Driel <
>>> jarno@quantumspork.nl> wrote:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> One of the problems I tried to raise/get answered (
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Jun/0043.html)
>>> about thehttp://schema.org/ItemList itemListElement property is that
>>> it's expected value is text. So if you mark up a top10 list of Things you
>>> loose the linkage between the ItemList and the Things it's about.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Now if the expected value of an itemListElement could also be a
>>> Thing, wouldn't both the order (of the output array) and the Things it's
>>> about be preserved?
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Justin Boyan <jaboyan@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> I support Martin's suggestion. This would also better model the
>>> common structure of "top 10 lists", such as these:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> http://www.zagat.com/l/boston/great-restaurants-for-ribs-in-boston
>>> > >>>>
>>> http://blogs.sfweekly.com/foodie/2012/01/san_franciscos_top_10_burritos.php
>>> > >>>>
>>> http://guestofaguest.com/new-york/nightlife/downtown-nyc-happy-hour-10-bars-to-check-out-after-work-today
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Note that in the last 2 of these 3 cases, the list is separated
>>> over multiple web pages, which makes it crucial to model the position
>>> number explicitly rather than trying to infer it from the container.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> I think ListItem should not be a subtype of WebPageElement -
>>> that's just confounding two things and adding a bunch of needless
>>> subproperties. It can live under schema.org/StructuredValue with other
>>> similar types.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> I would suggest that itemPosition be 1-based, rather than
>>> 0-based, since that is by far the predominant usage for all the use cases
>>> discussed above.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Justin
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Martin Hepp <
>>> martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> Hi Amit,
>>> > >>>>> If the goal is to merely capture the elements of a checklist as
>>> a list structure, then
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>    http://schema.org/ItemList
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> should IMO provide all that is needed.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> In RDFa or other RDF syntaxes, this of course means loosing the
>>> order of the items, as Vicki Tardif already pointed out.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> A simple solution would be to
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> 1. define a type ListItem with an additional property
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> itemPosition Number The position of the item in an ordered list
>>> 0 = first, 1 = second, ...
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> We could also reuse
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>        http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#displayPosition
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> for that; it serves a similar purpose.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> 2. expand the range of the itemListElement from Text to Text or
>>> ListItem
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> That should do the trick. At least I guess you could immediately
>>> mark up all of the example pages you listed.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> By the way, we should discuss whether ItemList should rather
>>> become a subtype of http://schema.org/WebPageElement, since we have
>>> Table there, so we may also want to have List there. A counter argument is
>>> that while Table is a significant Web page element type, List is a more
>>> generic data structure and not constrained to Web pages. (But then again,
>>> some tables outside of HTML markup, e.g. in JSON-LD or CSV, are also not
>>> WebPageElements in the strict sense).
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> Martin
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> On Sep 9, 2013, at 5:44 PM, TallyFy wrote:
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Some examples  ...
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Web:
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> http://www.realsimple.com/home-organizing/cleaning/fall-cleaning-checklist-00000000000928/index.html
>>> > >>>>>> http://www.wikihow.com/Main-Page
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> http://www.realsimple.com/weddings/dress-attire/wedding-gown-shopping-checklist-00000000000200/index.html
>>> > >>>>>> http://terrymorris.net/bestpractices/
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Gov:
>>> > >>>>>> https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-checklist
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hurricane-supply-checklist(in a pdf)
>>> > >>>>>> http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/ncp/repository (a simpler version
>>> would be great!)
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Health:
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Healthyhearts/Pages/Arrhythmiachecklist.aspx
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> I proposed this initiative just to wrap steps in a checklist.
>>> The capture of content from each step or conditional stuff is out of range
>>> and is a user interaction. There's many examples in the book "The Checklist
>>> Manifesto" by Dr. Atul Gawande:
>>> > >>>>>> http://gawande.com/the-checklist-manifesto
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> When Tallyfy launches in a few months, we will have some too.
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> thanks
>>> > >>>>>> Amit
>>> > >>>>>> On Monday, 9 September 2013 at 15:39, Martin Hepp wrote:
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Jason:
>>> > >>>>>>>> Process modeling is a rat hole and way out of scope, IMO
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> I fully agree ;-)
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> But even if you decide to add a very simple mechanism for
>>> exposing structured "step-by-step" info, I think that both
>>> > >>>>>>> a) explicit control flows (step x follows step x) and
>>> > >>>>>>> b( patterns for declarative approaches should be added (like
>>> "dependsOn" and "consequence" or"nextStep").
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> Is the proposal under discussion here driven by actual use
>>> cases? If such, it would be good to have a couple of sites at hand that
>>> currently expose such checklist or process information.
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> Martin
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> On Sep 9, 2013, at 4:33 PM, Jason Douglas wrote:
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> 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/
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------
>>> > >>>>>>> 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/
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >
>>> > > --------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > 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/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>