W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2013

Re: [whatwg] itemtypes from same vocabulary

From: Lin Clark <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:23:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CACho_Av7dsGmxUozJv6Aj1xNhZJh9ESSujWKcA_KtX5AcT_Feg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Itemtype cannot reference different vocabs. Here are two relevant
discussions that I know of, one with Hixie and the other with the HTML Data
Task Force.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2011Jun/0364.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-data-tf/2011Oct/0072.html


On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am looking for some guidance about the use of multiple itemtypes in
> microdata [1], specifically the phrase "defined to use the same
> vocabulary" in:
>
> """
> The item types must all be types defined in applicable specifications
> and must all be defined to use the same vocabulary.
> """
>
> For example, does this mean that I can't say:
>
> <div itemscope itemtype="http://acme.com/Foo http://zenith.com/Bar"> ...
> </div>
>
> The reason I ask is that there is some desire over in the schema.org
> community [2] to provide a mechanism for schema.org to be specialized.
> For example, in the case of an audiobook:
>
> <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Book
> http://www.productontology.org/id/Audiobook"> ... </div>
>
> The idea being not to overload schema.org with more vocabulary, and to
> let vocabularies grow a bit more organically. This schema.org group is
> currently thinking of using a one off property additionalType that
> would be used like so:
>
> <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Book">
>   <link itemprop="additionalType"
> href="http://www.productontology.org/id/Audiobook">
>   ...
> </div>
>
> I personally find this to be kind of distasteful since it replicates
> the mechanics that microdata's itemtype already offers.
>
> So, my question: is it the case that itemtype cannot reference types
> in different vocabularies like the example above? If so, I'm curious
> to know what the rationale was, and if perhaps it could be relaxed.
>
> //Ed
>
> [1]
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/microdata.html#items
> [2]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/2013Feb/0000.html
>



-- 
Lin Clark
Drupal Consultant

lin-clark.com
twitter.com/linclark
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 16:24:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:19 UTC