- From: Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 12:08:07 -0400
- To: Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>
- Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>, Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOr1obE=18MjVBwL7xhpawHYhrzMa0jDaBqsHpPXyqUbyL71wA@mail.gmail.com>
To forward this discussion, I have updated the original document. (Link again below.) Please forgive the length, as showing the differences doubled the length. I like the role-like syntax. The only issue I have is how to model a list that is an entity in its own right. In the example document, the "Billboard Top 200" is the clearest example. The list is not hanging off of a property. It is a creative work in its own right. In the examples, I used the "about" property from CreativeWork. I don't particularly like that, but could not come up with a better property off the top of my head. As always, comments are welcome here or on that document. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WIQvnaAWCdcPn3AouznLELbLCcHqkGlttYREChVFycc/edit?usp=sharing - Vicki Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vtardif@google.com On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com> wrote: > >It might be even more useful if the individual items used the same > property as refers to the list, > >rather than "item"; this would make the rules more like the Role class, > where the property referring > >to the Role is also used within the Role. > > +1 > > On Tue Aug 05 2014 at 10:20:17 AM Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> > wrote: > >> On Aug 4, 2014, at 11:25 PM, Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de> wrote: >> >> > itemPosition would not be the best solution as JSON array is an >> ordered collection and JSON-LD is a flavour of JSON. Add >> "unordered":"true" to catch order-irrelevant arrays. >> >> In this case, the JSON-LD could define itemListElement to have a list >> container ("@container": "@list"), and that would explicitly provide an >> order to those elements. Similarly, @inlist could be used with RDFa. >> Microdata has no syntax for describing ordered values, although the >> Microdata Registry could define itemListElement to be ordered (or an alias >> of this property). Unfortunately, I don't believe that such ordering is >> honored in the schema.org model, but I think that would be worth >> exploring. >> >> Another thing absent from this proposal is some way of dealing with >> external enumerations. It might be useful to consider a use case where the >> value of a property was a URL identifying such an external list. For >> example, looking at the Sports Event Series, which could potentially be >> quite large: >> >> { >> "@context": "http://schema.org", >> "@type": "SportsEvent", >> "@id": "/world-series/2013", >> "name": "2013 World Series", >> "subEvent": { >> "@id": "/world-seriece/2013/subEvents", >> "@type"; "ItemList" >> } >> } >> >> Then the list could be found through indirection: >> >> { >> "@context": "http://schema.org", >> "@type": "ItemList", >> "@id": "/world-series/2013/subEvents", >> "itemListElement": [{ >> "@type": "ListItem", >> "itemPosition": "1", >> "item": { >> "@type": "SportsEvent", >> "@id": "http://mlb.com/ws2013gl", >> "name": "2013 World Series - Game One" >> }, { >> ... >> }] >> } >> >> It might be even more useful if the individual items used the same >> property as refers to the list, rather than "item"; this would make the >> rules more like the Role class, where the property referring to the Role is >> also used within the Role. >> >> Lastly, very large lists might need to be paginated, but that could be >> left for some follow-on proposal. >> >> Gregg >> >> > All the best, >> > -Adrian >> > On 8/4/2014 6:10 PM, Dan Brickley wrote: >> >> Just a quick note to share an in-progress document towards improving >> >> the ItemList type. Many thanks to Vicki and Jason for taking a lead on >> >> this. >> >> >> >> https://docs.google.com/a/google.com/document/d/ >> 1WIQvnaAWCdcPn3AouznLELbLCcHqkGlttYREChVFycc/edit# >> >> >> >> For now it's shared a public google doc. We can export HTML later, but >> >> if anyone has trouble with it in this form please let me know. >> >> >> >> The idea is to collect together and review various ItemList-related >> >> scenarios across schema.org, to get an overview for possible >> >> improvements to ItemList. There are also machine readable schemas in a >> >> github branch (https://github.com/danbri/schemaorg/tree/sdo-itemlist/ >> data) >> >> that correspond to recent proposals discussed here. >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> >> >> Dan >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >>
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2014 16:08:35 UTC