- From: <lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:52:39 +0000
- To: Brahmanathaswami <brahma@hindu.org>
- Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
On 2015-02-03 01:14, Brahmanathaswami wrote: > I have posted this to both Stack Over flow and Expert's Exchange but > get no answer: > > Like many sites, we deliver a lot of imagery on our web site. > > Use case: set up labels/refinements in Google Custom Search that > aggregate and filter two different classes of image objects. Using > Schema.org Microdata markup is very easy and works great, but we want > the user to select either > > 1) PHOTOS: a "photo" is taken by with an instrument -- some kind of > camera/lens "machine" that comprises something from "real life" > > OR > > 2) ART: all other images that are creative works by an > illustrator/artist: our CMS/Dbase stores these and their metadata > under three categories, scanned paintings-water colors, scanned > drawings (or pencil drawings even done in a computer) and vector art. > > so we have four classes, which I want to group in two groups > > photography > | (group together in searches) | > > drawings, paintings, vector > > I can easily determine which is which as our web CMS gets metadata > from the database, and drives the content through the pipe and fork > dynamic insertion of metadata. Something like > > for art: <section class="page-content" role="main" itemprop="image" > itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" [1]> <meta > itemprop="image" content="Red Roses" /> > > and toggle to this if it were a photo > > "itemprop="photo" content="Daffodils" # photo > > This feels wrong from a hierarchy point of view. > > I would expect to have some property like "imageType" that I could > then apply like this > > itemprop="imageType" content="photo" > itemprop="imageType" content="art" > > But I don't see anything that meets this requirement in Schema.org > (my eyes are bleeding from reviewing the hierarchy and still can't > find what I need). There is nothing to designate "art" as such. > > Any ideas? > > My developer says we can use this for all non-photography images: > > <section class="page-content" role="main" itemprop="image" itemscope > itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" [1]> > > and for all photos: > > <section class="page-content" role="main" itemprop="image" itemscope > itemtype="http://schema.org/photo" [2]> > > But this also seems out of standard because: > > a) all the visuals that we offer, of all types I believe fall under > "ImageObject" > b) But children below only include "photo" and not any other kind of > visual "thing" > 3) I could use itemtype="http://schema.org/CreativeWork" [3] for > everything that is not a photo. Though in some semantic hierarchies a > photo, though strictly speaking is "an image of the real world made > with a lens/mechanical instrument), may still be classed as a sibling > with "painting" under parent "ImageObject" or parent "CreativeWork." > > While I realize there is some freedom in these decisions and Google > seems willing to parse anything i want to use, whether it follows the > schema.org hierarchy or not... I would like to start my "career" in > RDF/Microdata mark up (only now after doing web for 30 years!) on the > right foot/undrstanding. > > Swasti Astu, Be Well! > Brahmanathaswami > > Kauai's Hindu Monastery > www.HimalayanAcademy.com [4] > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] http://schema.org/ImageObject > [2] http://schema.org/photo > [3] http://schema.org/CreativeWork > [4] http://www.HimalayanAcademy.com Hi I saw your question on Stackoverflow at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28271240/schema-org-microdata-markup-to-distinguish-between-photos-and-art and it look's like user Unor has answered your question comprehensively. As Unor mentioned in their answer, a new schema for VisualArtwork will be released very soon (hopefully just a matter of days) that will enable you to mark up photos with http://schema.org/Photograph and art with http://schema.org/VisualArtwork. Paul
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2015 09:53:14 UTC