Skip to content

Conversation

@RichardWallis
Copy link
Contributor

Simplified and expanded dump files and updated associated documentation.

Results in:

  • schema.* files now contain all terms.
  • all-layers.* are duplicates of these updated schema.* files
  • updates to docs/developers.html to reflect these changes

Implements issue #2304

Note: The associated tweaks to the documentation assumes this PR will be merged and shipped in V9.0. If it does not make it into V9.0, there will be a need for a very minor tweak to the wording.

@danbri
Copy link
Contributor

danbri commented Jul 16, 2020

My review comments are in #2304

@RichardWallis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Following comments on issue, this PR has been updated to reflect the following file name changes and contents:

  • schemaorg-current - contains all terms from all sections
  • schemaorg-all - contains all terms from all sections plus attic

@danbri
Copy link
Contributor

danbri commented Jul 20, 2020

I've suggested to @RichardWallis that we address the desire for https-based URIs in our data dumps here, but adding parallel definitions (for a year or two) that use https spelling.

  • schemaorg-current-http
  • schemaorg-current-https
  • schemaorg-all-http
  • schemaorg-all-https

#2516

Regarding mappings between the two, I would be OK with adding OWL https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#equivalentClass-def and https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#equivalentProperty-def to the http file, and to a separate http-https-mappings file.ttl for the convenience of those who care. I do not want to burden the general ecosystem with the expectation that this is the right way to do things. It doesn't handle enumeration values, for example. I also do not want to see owl:sameAs used here; there is no reason to be having the debate on whether https://schema.org/Thing and http://schema.org/Thing are the self-same thing or two things with some kind of equivalence. We should show a clear lead that we'll be using https: as our canonical identifiers in the future, and provide utility dumps for those who aren't.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants