Re: schema.org docs: minor issues for next update

Thanks, very useful!

All:
When checking the recent additions from a GoodRelations perspective, I see no major problems. However, we should keep an eye on the balance of avoiding semantic clashes for properties  between orders (transactions) and offers. From a quick view, this is nicely solved in the current form by reusing *types* as possible (e.g. by using http://schema.org/PaymentMethod, originally from GoodRelations, now also for the payment method actually used for the transaction) while defining *new property names* for slightly different meanings.

For instance, the relations between and offer and a PaymentMethod is that this is a valid form of paying, while in the case of a transaction, it reflects the actually used one. As long as you keep using separate properties, this is fine.

If we had a major dilution of the meaning of GoodRelations properties in schema.org, this may cause problems in the long run.

But as said, from a quick view, things look okay. Just keep this on the radar.

Martin

On Nov 27, 2013, at 10:34 PM, Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche wrote:

> Hi Dan, all,
> 
> I'm experimenting in LOV a module to generate the documentation about modifications between two versions of a vocabulary.
> 
> Currently it is only available for schema.org for testing. You can access the dif pages from the history timeline at the bottom of the page. 
> http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/details/vocabulary_schema.html
> 
> Here are the links for all official schema versions changes including the one in dev ;)
> 
> v0.99 -> v1.0a http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_0.99-1.0a.html
> v1.0a -> v1.0b http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0a-1.0b.html
> v1.0b -> v1.0c http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0b-1.0c.html
> v1.0c -> v1.0d http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0c-1.0d.html
> v1.0d -> v1.0e(beta) http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0d-1.0e.html
> 
> Hope this feature can help everyone to see its light through modifications of schema.org.
> 
> Regards,
> Pierre-Yves.
> 
> 
> Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
> +Cc: Sam
> 
> On 26 November 2013 19:26, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:
> > I've reported these problems with the schema.org docs over the past few
> > months, but they're still present in the latest 1.0d update. So I'll try
> > to consolidate them and hopefully they can be dealt with in a single
> > pass for 1.0e!
> 
> Thanks for your persistence!
> 
> > * http://schema.org/ItemAvailability - typo in "availablity":
> >   "A list of possible product availablity options." should be   "A list of
> > possible product availability options."
> 
> Will be fixed in 1.0e.
> 
> > * http://schema.org/citation - invalid note in docs. The
> >   description says "NOTE: Candidate for promotion to ScholarlyArticle."
> >   when in fact the property was promoted from ScholarlyArticle to
> >   CreativeWork.
> 
> ditto.
> 
> >   The same problematic note appears in every inline description of
> >   "citation" in CreativeWork and all of its children.
> 
> ditto.
> 
> > * http://www.schema.org/docs/schema_org_rdfa.html still has no encoding
> >   declaration in the <head> element or HTTP header. This can cause
> >   difficulties for parsers.
> 
> Adding <meta charset="UTF-8" /> to head.
> 
> > * "antagonym" still appears in the descriptions of
> >   http://schema.org/AcceptAction and other actions. This is being
> >   tracked at https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/24 but
> >   was missed in the 1.0d update.
> 
> Deferring until next Actions update. Sam - can you track this?
> 
> We have a 1.0e release about ready to go but waiting on some final
> checks (and slowed down by US vacation). I've just added these tweaks.
> 
> Here's a test build (which includes Accessibility and Order):
> 
> http://sdopending.appspot.com/ItemAvailability
> http://sdopending.appspot.com/CreativeWork
> http://sdopending.appspot.com/citation
> 
> also http://sdopending.appspot.com/docs/schema_org_rdfa.html
> 
> How's that looking?
> 
> Dan
> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp 
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
=================================================================
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/

Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2013 22:54:31 UTC