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

Re: http://schema.org/CreativeWork: headline and name properties?

From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 10:06:40 -0600
Message-ID: <CAChbWaMuUB=pdmEygqOGCU9pYPFKGAeYGzBGcEzgh0RC3vvddw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
Cc: SchemaDot Org <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Your right that it comes from the rNews use cases.  And the reason is that
from the publishing world a "headline" is not always the same text as the
"name" of the CreativeWork, sometimes even vastly different.  The
"headline" used is up to the editor-in-chief ultimately.

    name = "Nuclear Energy and public perceptions"
    headline := "Nuclear Energy: Do we still need it ?"

Hope this helps.

+1 to keeping "headline".  Publishers need it, just ask them.

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:

> Per the subject, CreativeWork seems a bit unusual in that the purpose of
> its "headline" property appears to overlap the generic "name" property that
> it gets from Thing. The examples at http://schema.org/Article and
> http://schema.org/MedicalScholarlyArticle use "name" instead of
> "headline", and grepping my local mirror of schema.org suggests there are
> zero usages of "headline" in the schema.org examples.
> I understand that this property came via rNews, perhaps due to a desire to
> offer a simple equivalence for organizations already using rNews markup,
> but I believe it just complicates usage for those employing native
> schema.org markup.
> While there are certainly cases where "headline" has been used for native
> schema.org markup in the wild (such as the example at
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/microdata.html#json),
> due to the impossibility of predicting how schema.org processors will
> treat the property, the most pragmatic suggestions have been to double up
> both headline and name - see, for example, Aaron Bradley's tweet on the
> matter: https://twitter.com/aaranged/status/365969834636349441
> The one use case I could envision for maintaining the "headline" property
> is in a multi-type situation involving a CreativeWork + some other type
> where you want to differentiate the CreativeWork "name" from the other
> type's "name". However, this could occur with many other multi-type
> situations, and thus might warrant a more generic solution*. (I hesitate to
> suggest this, as something like <type>Name for every type seems like the
> most likely outcome... but there you have it)
> So to promote a best practices approach for CreativeWork types going
> forward, perhaps "headline" should be marked as "deprecated" with direction
> given to using "name" instead?
> Thanks,
> Dan Scott
> * That said, the desire to disambiguate multi-type situations is
> effectively why schemabibex proposed PublicationVolume/volumeNumber instead
> of just relying on "name": given that one of our scenarios is the
> combination of Book + PublicationVolume, we needed a way to disambiguate
> the book title from the volume name.

+ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>
Received on Sunday, 26 January 2014 16:07:08 UTC

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