W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > January 2014

Re: Socialnetworks of a person or organization

From: David Deering <david@touchpointdigital.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:37:50 -0600
Message-ID: <52E296DE.5030503@touchpointdigital.net>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
I've been listening to the conversation and have been debating with 
something myself.  I'd like to see a way in which business listings and 
business profile pages could also be distinguished through Schemas.  
Particularly, I'm referring to a business' listing on sites such as 
Yelp, Angie's List, YP.com, Foursquare, Infogroup, Acxiom, Factual, 
Nokia, CitySearch, and even listings such as Google+ Local, Bing Places, 
and Yahoo Local.  Whereas a Google+ Local or Business/Brand page could 
be considered a social account, I don't believe that the others could.

So I'm not sure if SocialAccount would fit those applications, and I'm 
also not sure if Account would be too general or vague.  Maybe 
BusinessListing, BusinessPage, ProfilePage, or even Page would be a 
better suited type for those pages, I don't know.  So I'm just throwing 
that out there to get everyone's thoughts.  Thanks.


On 1/24/2014 10:04 AM, Matthias Tylkowski wrote:
> Maybe SocialAccount and Account in general is not the right direction 
> to  go. Account data itself is usually private data and in a private 
> place  (only visible for logged in people or admin).
> No one (correct me if I'm wrong) would want to markup username and 
> password and what would be the benefit?
> In my View behind an Account is always a Person, either with real or 
> fake data, but in concept it is about a Person.
> The Idea behind the SocialAccount proposal was to markup where a 
> information about one Person can be found.
> "Look I'm on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook"
> Regards
> Matthias
> -- 
> Technischer Leiter
> Binarypark UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
> Erich-Weinert-Str. 1
> 03046 Cottbus
> Tel +49 (0)355 692931
> Fax +49 (0)355 694171
> info@binarypark.org
> http://binarypark.org   
> Am 24.01.2014 15:53, schrieb Thad Guidry:
>> Agreed, that a generic "Account" naming convention might be best to 
>> handle 100% of all use cases from the highest level.
>> I'd rather switch the semantics of "social" presence to just the 
>> 1960's view of ... a "login presence".
>> My personal definition of "Account" type would be defined as:
>> "An identifier for a login presence of a Person, Organization, or 
>> Thing that represents them within a site or app"
>> (the key semantic difference in my definition is that it says it's an 
>> "identifier for the presence" of a Person, Organization, Thing on a 
>> site or app...and not necessarily the physical entity)
>> The idea is further stretched into Drupal terms, (correct me if I'm 
>> wrong, Stéphane) such as forums, etc, where "Account" is pseudo 
>> for "login" or "login presence" that holds properties of 
>> "accountName" and "password", etc.
>> In machine terms, an "Account" is attached to a "login" typically, 
>> with all it's relevant properties that are usually provided with an 
>> "Account" type... username, password, full name, address, bank 
>> account #, account_id, 
>> other_Accounts_on_the_web_that_you_want_to_link_to_this_Account, etc, 
>> etc, etc.
>> An "Account" 's username property is not necessarily their 
>> "identifier for their presence", but typically is established in such 
>> a way nowadays.  (Login with your Facebook Account instead, blah, blah)
>> -- 
>> -Thad
>> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>> Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>
Received on Friday, 24 January 2014 16:38:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:21 UTC