- From: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
- Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:29:19 -0500
- To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- Cc: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Matthias Tylkowski <matthias@binarypark.org>, SchemaDot Org <public-vocabs@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJcoVMiGaYT0fMD-RRmee6=Ghupe-aBo9s4Uzk=upPg3t5aqyw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org > wrote: > > On Feb 3, 2014, at 5:46 PM, Dan Scott wrote: > > > > I think it makes a lot of sense to try and distill some best practices > here, and hopefully reflect those into the documentation. Let's take a > concert ticket as an example, which would probably be a multi-typed > "schema:Product schema:MusicEvent" (and please correct me on any of these > assumptions!) > > > > - name of the item > > > > Assuming we're using schema:name here, are we talking about the name of > the MusicEvent or the name of the Product? (That is, "Katy Perry's > Prismatic World Tour 2014" or "Ticket for Katy Perry's Prismatic World Tour > 2014"). I'm guessing that in the case of a multi-typed Product it would be > the latter. > > > > - title / headline > > > > I think that for multi-typed entity you can only have the same name for > the different roles of the object. A "convention" that relies on details of > the syntactical representation is likely to break in a multi-syntax > environment with RDFa, Microdata, and JSON-LD on the table. > > If one wants to model different names for multiple roles of the same > entity, I would define them as two entities and link them via sameAs. Then > you have stated equivalence of the entities while you are still able to > properly represent differing values for the same property. > > This does of course not work if you use a reasoner that consolidates the > facts from multiple representations of the same entity. But OWL-style > reasoning is, IMO, not very relevant in processing schema.org data, at > least as of today (and sameAs in schema.org is not formally equivalent to > owl:sameAs anyway). > > Agreed on all points; thanks, Martin, as always, for the clarity and thoughtfulness of your reply! One of my goals in putting together a concrete example was to try and tease out the intended difference between the "name of the item" and the "title / headline" generic properties you had put forward (which is also relevant to the initial subject of this thread). Over in GoodRelations, you have gr:name as equivalent to dc:title, so there seems to be no meaningful difference there. Can you provide a little more insight into how you think those properties should be differentiated in schema.org? Thanks, Dan
Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2014 14:30:16 UTC