Replies: 11 comments
-
Just noticed this question seems to overlap with issue #3250. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Another thing I'm wondering is how does Many sites offer different feature bundles depending on the type of subscription you choose (and they often actually use the term features for this). Though in my perception Something we can't do when just using |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
When you see “url or text”, that is a kind of schema.org way of saying “edge of the known universe”, ie. that there be more territory to map here, but in the meantime, don’t be surprised by urls. This effectively does something similar to DefinedTerm… |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I get the point of “edge of the known universe” but for the example I was working on there aren't any urls per feature I can refer to. As on many sites offering software subscriptions, this example has 1 page (eg. Now if I were to use And if that's considered OK, wouldn't that mute any argument for adding |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
The purpose of the However, I think you are just touching the surface of things you may want to describe about a Many of thes questions and associated discussions have lead to the current shape of the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'd be all up for resolving this via multi-typing I'm just asking these questions here (and not as an issue) because I'm suffering from a brain-freeze caused by questions like:
And just to be clear, I've been taking “edge of the known universe” well into account and am not contemplating this for any specific so-called SEO purposes (although I might actually use it in real life). I was just wondering how I could express this within the boundaries of current schema.org vocab constraints without stretching things so far that I start introducing ambiguity as opposed to any additional meaning I'm hoping to express. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@jvandriel what should be added to the range DefinedTerm and/or PropertyValue? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Nothing really @ljgarcia. I just noticed your discussion and was wondering (since it was mentioned in the discussion) what you wanted to do with And since I was struggling whether to use |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I am not sure I understand your application scenario completely, but as for product / services features, we basically have two options:
This approach has been described in detail in this paper, the principle is explained in here. The advantage of this approach is that (1) you can decouple the evolution of the standardization of product properties from the evolution of schema.org, (2) you avoid a lot of legal trouble in comparison to deriving Web vocabularies from other standards like eClass, UNSPSC, ETIM, etc. (I tried for years...)., and (3) you can always use the latest version of the referenced standard without waiting for schema.org updates. /CC @danbri |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm totally fine with option [2] @mfhepp. There was just some confusement on my end as to how to express the properties (a.k.a. features) of a Though I've come to the conclusion it is quite OK to be able to express features as a list of strings as sort of a simple summary. Whereas |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
For such „boolean“ product characteristics, you can also use the additionalProperty pattern with a value of schema:true.Am 01.08.2023 um 14:15 schrieb Jarno van Driel ***@***.***>:
I'm totally fine with option [2] @mfhepp. There was just some confusement on my end as to how express the properties (a.k.a. features) of a SoftwareApplication because of the fact that Class has a featureList property.
Though I've come to the conclusion it is quite OK to be able to express features as a list of strings as sort of a simple summary. Whereas additionalProperty can be used to describe each property in depth (as you described).
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
While working on some code examples for somebody I ran into a bit of a conundrum regarding
SoftwareApplication
.This type has a
featureList
property yet its expected value is eitherText
orUrl
, meaning the expected value doesn't allow for a type likeDefinedTerm
to be used so that one can express (for example) thename
anddescription
of a feature.The alternative would be to specify a multi-typed entity like
["Product","SoftwareApplication"]
and useadditionalProperty > PropertyValue
instead. Yet this makes me wonder what the point of havingfeatureList
is, do we consider feature = property?So what do you think would be the best solution here?
featureList
to includeDefinedTerm
additionalProperty > PropertyValue
to describe the individual features of aSoftwareApplication
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions