Re: has, is, of

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:27:36AM -0700, Karen Coyle wrote:
>I hope this isn't another can of worms, but I would like a reality 
>check on the use of "has, is, of" in property names. DanBri made a 
>terse statement in a recent email [1]

Dan previously stated in reply to another property naming policy
question of yours, around case-sensitivity being the only distinguisher
between a property and a name (for example, "review" and "Review"):

"""
The schema.org team haven't yet decided on what to do, but a possibility
is to introduce new hasXyz property names, and mark the original form as
deprecated in favour of the has-based version.
"""
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Dec/0037.html

We took this statement of direction into consideration when we proposed
"hasPart" as part of the Periodical proposal. Formal guidance for future
proposals would be welcome, of course, should the schema.org team come
to such a decision!

In an effort to reduce the number of worms in the can for the other
property name forms, the reality check for the current usage of "fooOf"
properties in schema.org is as follows:

branchOf
causeOf
comprisedOf
estimatesRiskOf
increasesRiskOf
isPartOf
isVariantOf
memberOf
predecessorOf
successorOf

And the currently used "isFoo" properties are:

isAvailableGenerically
isBasedOnUrl
isConsumableFor
isFamilyFriendly
isGift
isPartOf
isProprietary
isRelatedTo
isSimilarTo
isVariantOf

(In passing and off topic and mostly for danbri, I note that "issuedBy"
appears twice in schema.org/docs/schema_org_rdfa.html with different
domainIncludes directives and descriptions, which is weird; some have
"<span>Domain" and others have "<span>domain").

Received on Sunday, 20 April 2014 19:11:35 UTC