- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 09:06:53 -0700
- To: chaals@yandex-team.ru, Anke Wehner <anke.wehner@gmail.com>, Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com>
- CC: Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com>, "Wallis,Richard" <richard.wallis@oclc.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, "Peter F.Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
On 10/24/14 1:57 AM, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote: > Note that Richard's fictionalThing proposal in webschemas already has > something for this - properties saying where the fictional thing is > "first described", and things that reference it (you may not be an > expert on king arthur, I think I'd prefer dropping the term "first" from that. It requires knowledge that may not be available. I could be describing a story about a the lost city of Atlantis, but not know where it was "first" described. Or I may not have on hand the bibliographic information of the first Discworld book in which he appeared when I need to describe DEATH as a fictional character. I like to think of data creators as non-omniscient but well-meaning. kc but if you write about him you can provide the > referencedIn property. If you are, you can argue about whether Gildas or > Geraldus Cambrensis are really the original descriptions…). > http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/FictionalThing > cheers > Chaals >> >> >> On 22 October 2014 03:10, Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com >> <mailto:sesuncedu@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Jarno van Driel >> <jarnovandriel@gmail.com <mailto:jarnovandriel@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> "If someone can explain to me what the driving motivator >> is for taking this metaphysical stance is" >> >> uh, in my case it has absolutely nothing to do with >> metaphysical anything. I write markup, and a lots of it. I >> look at what I need to disambiguate and seek for solutions >> which help me do so. The easier and more obvious those >> solutions are, the the bigger the chance is I'll apply them. >> If the MTE route means it makes my life, and that of any other >> who has to deal with marking up pages, easier, than I'm a >> happy camper. Do I worry if it makes the work of those who >> have to extract that data fractionally more difficult? Nope >> not a bit. >> >> Jarno - >> I think I understand what your concerns are now, so with luck I >> might be able to explain things better. >> Under the mix-in scheme, the page markup would look like: >> >> <div itemtype="http://schema.org/Person" >> itemtype="http://schema.org/FictionalThing" ...> >> ... >> </div> >> >> Under the alternative I suggested, the page markup would look like: >> >> <div itemtype="http://schema.org/Fictional(Person) >> <http://schema.org/Fictional(Person>" ...> >> .... >> </div> >> >> The latter markup does not appear more complicated than the >> former, and has the advantage of not requiring making massive >> changes to the core of schema.org <http://schema.org/> just to >> make extracting data /possible/! >> Under the first scheme, an application that knows about >> schema:Person but does not know about the new >> schema:FictionalThing /will/ think it's looking at a description >> of a real Person. >> >> There will have to be a new mechanisms devised to allow webmasters >> to say that something is not a FictionalThing. Then someone will >> have to explain it to them. >> Under the second scheme, an application that knows about Person, >> but does not know about Fictional(Person) will see an unrecognized >> type. >> Does this make more sense? >> Simon >> >> >> >> >> -- >> http://ankewehner.de <http://ankewehner.de/> > -- > Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex > chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
Received on Friday, 24 October 2014 16:07:26 UTC