- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:05:33 +0100
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard.cyganiak@deri.org>
- Cc: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
Richard, On 28 Jul 2011, at 14:01, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > On 27 Jul 2011, at 22:25, Jeni Tennison wrote: >> From what I can see, the documented meaning of http://schema.org/startDate and http://schema.org/endDate is different depending on whether the item is a TVSeason/TVSeries or an Event. > > What makes you think so? The documentation (in the table of properties) is exactly the same. Oh, I was basing my assertion on the OWL ontology at: http://schema.org/docs/schemaorg.owl where startDate and endDate have two different comments each. >> Makes me think you can't have a generic mapping that gives a good output in RDF terms. > > My conclusion too. > > The Microdata spec gives certain powers to the documents that define vocabularies. Does the vocabulary allow dereferencing of type URLs? Which types support itemid? That's up to the document defining the vocabulary. > > I was thinking that the Microdata spec could say that these documents can also specify how local property names are expanded to IRIs in the RDF mapping. So, the schema.org documentation could authoritatively define that startDate gets expanded to http://schema.org/startDate or whatever else makes sense. Good idea. > That would of course be moot if the RDF mapping gets dropped. Well, what I was proposing at the beginning the thread was, assuming that the current RDF mapping gets dropped, setting up a Community Group to specify a microdata/RDF mapping. They/we could create a document which said what you say above, plus perhaps some default rules in the case where the vocabulary doesn't say anything. Cheers, Jeni -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2011 16:05:59 UTC