OK. You have read the previous posts in this series. You have said to yourself I only wish that I could describe [insert you favourite issue here] in Schema.org. You are now inspired to do something about it, or get together with a community of colleagues to address the usefulness of Schema.org for your area of interest. Then comes the inevitable question: Where do I focus my efforts – the core vocabulary or a Hosted Extension or an External Extension?
Having covered the working environment; I now intend to describe some of the important files that make up Schema.org and how you can work with them to create or update, examples and term definitions within your local forked version.
I find myself in New York for the day on my way back from the excellent Smart Data 2015 Conference in San Jose. It’s a long story about red-eye flights and significant weekend savings which I won’t bore you with, but it did result in some great chill-out time in Central Park to reflect on the week.
In its long auspicious history the SemTech, Semantic Tech & Business, and now Smart Data Conference has always attracted a good cross section of the best and brightest in Semantic Web, Linked Data, Web, and associated worlds. This year was no different. In my new role as an independent working with OCLC and at Google.
I was there on behalf of OCLC to review significant developments with Schema.org in general – now with 640 Types (Classes) & 988 properties – used on over 10 Million web sites.
A bit of a profound question – triggered by a guest post on Museums Computer Group by Nick Poole CEO of The Collections Trust about Culture Grid and an overview of recent announcements about it. Broadly the changes are that: The Culture Grid closed to ‘new accessions’ (ie. new collections of metadata) on the 30th April The existing index and API will continue to operate in order to ensure legacy support Museums, galleries, libraries and archives wishing to contribute material to Europeana can still do so via the ‘dark aggregator’, which the Collections Trust will continue to fund Interested parties …
About a month ago Version 2.0 of the Schema.org vocabulary hit the streets. But does this warrant the version number clicking over from 1.xx to 2.0?
This post is about an unusual, but very useful, aspect of the Schema.org vocabulary — the Role type.
Google announced yesterday that it is the end of the line for Freebase – will this be good for Wikidata?
Several significant bibliographic related proposals were brought together in a package which I take great pleasure in reporting was included in the latest v1.9 release of Schema.org
They’re released! A couple of months back I spoke about the preview release of Works data from WorldCat.org. Today OCLC published a press release announcing the official release of 197 million descriptions of bibliographic Works. A Work is a high-level description of a resource, containing information such as author, name, descriptions, subjects etc., common to all editions of the work. The description format is based upon some of the properties defined by the CreativeWork type from the Schema.org vocabulary. In the case of a WorldCat Work description, it also contains [Linked Data] links to individual, OCLC numbered, editions already shared …
One of the most challenging challenges in my evangelism of the benefits of using Schema.org for sharing data about resources via the web is that it is difficult to ‘show’ what is going on. The scenario goes something like this….. “Using the Schema.org vocabulary, you embed data about your resources in the HTML that makes up the page using either microdata or RDFa….” At about this time you usually display a slide showing html code with embedded RDFa. It may look pretty but the chances of more than a few of the audience being able to pick out the schema:Book …