Re: Socialnetworks of a person or organization

On 4/12/14 7:15 PM, Thad Guidry wrote:
> CHOICE A:
>
> <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
> <span itemprop="name">Thad Guidry</span>
>     (<a itemprop="url" 
> href="https://www.freebase.com/m/07dkfwx#this">Thad Guidry's topic on 
> Freebase</a>,
>      <a itemprop="webid" 
> href="http://twitter.com/thadguidry#this">Thad Guidry's twitter 
> account</a>,
> <a itemprop="webid"
> href="http://www.freebase.com/user/thadguidry#this">Thad Guidry's user 
> account on Freebase</a>,
> <a itemprop="webid"
> href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry#this">Thad Guidry's user 
> account on LinkedIn</a>)
> </div>
>
> CHOICE B:
>
> <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
> <span itemprop="name">Thad Guidry</span>
>     (<a itemprop="sameAs" 
> href="https://www.freebase.com/m/07dkfwx">Thad Guidry's topic on 
> Freebase</a>,
>      <a itemprop="socialAccount" 
> href="http://twitter.com/thadguidry">Thad Guidry's twitter account</a>,
> <a itemprop="account"
> href="http://www.freebase.com/user/thadguidry">Thad Guidry's user 
> account on Freebase</a>,
> <a itemprop="sameAs"
> href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry#this">Thad Guidry's 
> profile on LinkedIn</a>)
> </div>
>
>
> I would pick B every time.
>
> At this point, I see no additional gain for the Stakeholders, Web 
> Developers, Apps, or me.
>
> #this feels....burdensome and adds an additional layer that is 
> actually outside the Schema.org property's understanding.  And 
> besides, Fragments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragment_identifier 
> like what your trying to reuse, are nice and cool, and those depend on 
> a client to process them...however they wish....a server does nothing 
> with fragments, last time I checked the RFC's.
>
> Willing to look at it through your eyes Kingsley, but your going to 
> have to give us examples that show the benefit that your 
> pitching...even live working examples with some App or Webpage out 
> there that understands your ideas and can build relations with them. 
>  Schema.org has to meet the needs of the plenty...not of the few.
>
> Proof in the pudding big guy ?

CHOICE A:

<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
<span itemprop="name">Thad Guidry</span>
     (<a itemprop="url" 
href="https://www.freebase.com/m/07dkfwx#this">Thad Guidry's topic on 
Freebase</a>,
      <a itemprop="webid" href="http://twitter.com/thadguidry#this">Thad 
Guidry's twitter account</a>,
<a itemprop="webid"
href="http://www.freebase.com/user/thadguidry#this">Thad Guidry's user 
account on Freebase</a>,
<a itemprop="webid"
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry#this">Thad Guidry's user 
account on LinkedIn</a>)
</div>


Turtle Translation:

<>
<http://www.w3.org/ns/md#item> [
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> 
<http://schema.org/Person> ;
                                <http://schema.org/name> "Thad Guidry";
                                <http://schema.org/url> 
<https://www.freebase.com/m/07dkfwx#this>;
                                <http://schema.org/webid> 
<http://twitter.com/thadguidry#this>,
<http://www.freebase.com/user/thadguidry#this>,
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry#this>
                               ] ;
<http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#usesVocabulary> <http://schema.org/> .

CHOICE B:

<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">
<span itemprop="name">Thad Guidry</span>
     (<a itemprop="sameAs" 
href="https://www.freebase.com/m/07dkfwx">Thad Guidry's topic on 
Freebase</a>,
      <a itemprop="socialAccount" 
href="http://twitter.com/thadguidry">Thad Guidry's twitter account</a>,
<a itemprop="account"
href="http://www.freebase.com/user/thadguidry">Thad Guidry's user 
account on Freebase</a>,
<a itemprop="sameAs"
href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry#this">Thad Guidry's profile 
on LinkedIn</a>)
</div>

Turtle Translation:

<>
<http://www.w3.org/ns/md#item> [
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> 
<http://schema.org/Person> ;
                                   <http://schema.org/account> 
<http://www.freebase.com/user/thadguidry>;
                                   <http://schema.org/name> "Thad Guidry";
                                   <http://schema.org/sameAs> 
<https://www.freebase.com/m/07dkfwx>,
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry#this>;
<http://schema.org/socialAccount> <http://twitter.com/thadguidry>
                               ] ;
<http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#usesVocabulary> <http://schema.org/> .


Comments:

The only issue with either suggestion you are making is "sameAs" since 
most will not pick up on the subtleties in your example. Basically, your 
"sameAs" relation doesn't conflate entity types. You even use the 
fragment identifier to disambiguate the LinkedIn profile page (one 
entity) and the entity it describes (i.e., entity "you" ). Others, based 
on the target audience of Schema.org will not. If you use "webid" 
instead of "sameAs" you will be able to describe the "webid" 
relationship property in simple terms without confusion. If you use 
"sameAs" even describing the property will be problematic, try 
describing it to see what I mean.


At this juncture, my only concern is about the use of "sameAs" which 
can't escape the "equivalence connotation" . Crafting a paragraph that 
describes a "sameAs" relationship property  versus doing the same in 
regards to a "webid" relationship property is basically all the proof 
you need :-)

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen