- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 07:46:43 -0800
- To: public-vocabs@w3.org
Jarno - I think your example of a sidebar is analogous to the "article in a periodical". It is physically "part of" but has its own identity and semantics. kc On 1/19/14, 4:09 AM, Jarno van Driel wrote: > Hi Niklas, > > All though I can image many cases where 'hasPart' could come in very > handy indeed, when I read the description of 'hasPart' at [1] > "Periodicals, Articles and Multi-volume Works" it says: > hasPart (CreativeWork). A related CreativeWork that is included either > logically or physically in this CreativeWork; for example, things in a > collection, parts in a multi-part work, or articles in a periodical or > publication issue. > > For me the problem lies with the word 'related'. Now sorry in advance if > I'm being nitpicky here or misunderstand the description but I can also > imagine/provide examples where a webpage element (like WPSideBar) can > contain different webpage elements which don't share any relation > besides the fact that they are part of the WPSideBar but are about > completely different subjects. > > Take the sidebar of any given eCommerce site, which can contain many > different blocks, about different subjects that only occupy the same > screenspace but don't have a semantical relationship. > > Now I don't dare to state I know best, I just try to clarify the way it > makes sense in my mind - which is subjective to say the least - and I > agree with Martin that it would be great to know in which direction > (conceptually) the sponsors of schema.org <http://schema.org/> think > themselves. > > > > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com > <mailto:lindstream@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi Martin, all, > > In the recent [1] "Periodicals, Articles and Multi-volume Works" > proposal [2] from the SchemaBibEx group, we've suggested a widening > of isPartOf, along with the addition of a hasPart property, to cover > general composition. (This is actually an inclusion of an earlier > proposal from us [3].) > > Since the proposal is to use CreativeWork (of which both WebPage and > WebPageElement are subclasses) for both domain and range of these > properties, this case would be solved as well. > > Cheers, > Niklas > > [1]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Jan/0086.html > [2]. > http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi-volume_Works > [3]: http://www.w3.org/community/schemabibex/wiki/Collection > > > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Martin Hepp > <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org > <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote: > > Hi Jarno, > Thanks for the swift reply. I also think mentions could be a > quick fix for that; maybe Dan can comment on whether this > direction is supported (conceptually) by the sponsors of > schema.org <http://schema.org>? Then, simply updating the > textual definition would do the trick. > Martin > > On Jan 19, 2014, at 10:34 AM, Jarno van Driel wrote: > > > So far I have been using http://schema.org/mentions to link > (secondary) webpageelements to a WebPage, while using > http://schema.org/text to enclose the primary content, and > personally I'm quite happy marking it up as such. > > > > I always figured that webpage elements like > WPHeader/WPSideBar/etc mirror their HTML equivalents like > <header>/<aside>/etc, which in their turn exist to markup > related/secondary content. For me the meaning of > http://schema.org/mentions reflects this perfectly while > http://schema.org/pageElement seems a bit too generic and could > lead to confusion weither it implies primary or secondary > webpage elements. > > > > Now I'm aware the description of http://schema.org/mentions > doesn't reflect this and on top of that there are no clear > examples on schema.org <http://schema.org> which show how to > properly use webpage elements but maybe adding some good > examples would be enough to clarify things. Adding a new > property for this seems a bit overkill IMHO. > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Martin Hepp > <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org > <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote: > > Dear all: > > > > As far as I understand, > > > > http://schema.org/WebPageElement > > > > would provide a nice way of exposing the meaning of, and > meta-data for, page elements, which could be used by search > engines e.g. for guessing the best contextual links (as opposed > to breadcrumbs, which imply some kind of hierarchy). In > particular, one could nicely use > > > > http://schema.org/SiteNavigationElement > > > > to mark-up important links inside the page, which would often > make good contextual links. > > > > Unfortunately, > > > > http://schema.org/WebPage > > > > does not define a generic property for linking from the > WebPage to multiple > > > > http://schema.org/WebPageElement > > > > entities in the same page. > > > > Formally, > > > > http://schema.org/mentions > > > > would work, but I am unsure whether this is intended. > > > > http://schema.org/isPartOf > > > > would work from the perspective of the > > > > http://schema.org/SiteNavigationElement, > > > > but could lead to circular processing of the data. > > > > http://schema.org/mainContentOfPage > > > > works only for the most important WegPageElement. > > > > I think the best solution would be to add a property > > > > http://schema.org/pageElement > > > > Indicates that the web page element is a relevant part of the > Web page (e.g. for linking from a web page to its site > navigation elements). > > > > What do others think? Did I miss anything? > > > > Martin > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > martin hepp > > e-business & web science research group > > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen > > > > e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org > <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> > > phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217> > > fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620> > > www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) > > http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) > > skype: mfhepp > > twitter: mfhepp > > > > Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! > > ================================================================= > > * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > martin hepp > e-business & web science research group > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen > > e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> > phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217> > fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620> > www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) > http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) > skype: mfhepp > twitter: mfhepp > > Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! > ================================================================= > * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ > > > > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Sunday, 19 January 2014 15:47:10 UTC