Re: Proposal: Audiobook

I don't believe microformats have the concept of explicit types.

With microdata, rdfa and json-ld, yes, you can.

guha


On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:

> I believe there was a question about using multiple types in microformat
> markup which I can't find now, nor an answer. So in case I dreamed it all,
> I'll rephrase it here: can one use multiple types in a microformat markup,
> and could someone please provide a brief example?
>
> Thank you,
> kc
>
>
> On 9/26/13 5:46 AM, Vicki Tardif Holland wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Martin Hepp
>> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.**org <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>> <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-**unibw.org<martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     Now, we can take at least two approaches for handling this:
>>
>>     1. We can use multiple supertypes, i.e. materialize a multiple
>>     inheritance relation (e.g. make AudioBook a subtype of both
>>     CreativeWorks and Product)
>>     2. We can encourage the use of multiple types at markup time.
>>
>>     I strongly recommend option #2, because
>>
>>     - it waives the need to define relevant combinations ex ante,
>>     - it avoids the irritating listing of properties that are not
>>     relevant for most use cases, and
>>     - it decouples the evolution of type combinations from the evolution
>>     of the schema.org <http://schema.org> specification.
>>
>>
>>
>> Decoupling the evolution of type combinations from the evolution of the
>> specification is an important point. If we have to serve all of the uses
>> of AudioBook (or any other type) in its specification, we are going to
>> end up with a tangle of multiple inheritance and/or duplicate properties
>> which authors will not understand how to use.
>>
>> - Vicki
>>
>> Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist |vtardif@google.com
>> <mailto:vtardif@google.com>
>>
>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
>
>