Re: Semantically marking up a "checklist" or process

On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl>wrote:
>
>> What I tried to portray is more a thought than an exact proposition. My
>> point with it is that IMHO it would better to have an 'order' mechanism
>> within schema.org/Thing than having it only applied to a
>> schema.org/ListItem. Mainly because I think a mechanism to create order
>> can be applicable in many more situations besides a schema.org/ItemListand was wondering if others agree with this line of thought
>>
>
> Chaining might be sufficient for these procedural use cases, but it
> doesn't seem sufficient as a universal schema.org list mechanism... track
> numbers on a CD, for example, can have gaps in the numerical sequence.  Or
> numbered lists might not start at 1 (or 0 ;-).
>

... or representing a tie, which in numbered lists is often done as: 1, 2,
2, 4, etc.


>
>>
>> Now as for the exact way how we can accomplish this, I'm sure there are
>> plenty of folks here who know a lot more on how to accomplish something
>> like this than I do. So by all means correct me where I'm wrong.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>wrote:
>>
>>> 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.htmlThe 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/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>