-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
review used schema.org terms for existence and relevance #271
Comments
TODO: find a better IRI for Purchase... or define it here. |
https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/search?q=Purchase&type=code Seems stale, should be closed. |
@VladimirAlexiev , this is defined by us, not schema.org. |
Let me quote from https://github.com/w3c-ccg/traceability-vocab/blob/main/docs/openapi/components/schemas/common/BillOfLading.yml#L38 $linkedData:
term: relatedDocuments
'@id': https://schema.org/Purchase @nissimsan please reopen |
No, do not reopen... create a new issue with a clear and actionable description something like: title: Update broken IRIs in BillOfLading RDF Class |
@OR13 Please read the issue title. I gave just one example. |
@VladimirAlexiev, can you elaborate on the latter, pls? |
@OR13 But could you please check in the ontology (JSONLD or Turtle) to make sure? |
Apparently, the powers that be at schema.org haven't read the CoolURIs article, never mind that @danbri has been involved in the worlds of Linked Data and semantic webs nigh unto forever.... FWIW, generally, if not universally, There's nothing wrong with |
re
We would respond to data consumers saying they'd use it. However it is not clear what property to use to associate non-type, non-property terms, e.g. http://schema.org/AudiobookFormat and https://schema.org/AudiobookFormat I am not convinced owl:sameAs works, as it is such as strong claim. |
Noting that a |
If you want verifiable-credentials level assurance, you probably should be
using https: throughout (and avoid remote context URLs
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jo4-dTDo1osL3Mr9-THqwKywWu-NiFGagFTQV5mr-N8/edit#>
)
…On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 at 09:54, Nis Jespersen ***@***.***> wrote:
Noting that a http -> https redirect still breaks the Verifiable
Credential proof.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#271 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABJSGLTOYZ3X3EEPJEF2RDV24YE3ANCNFSM5MYMP27Q>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Yes, agreed, @danbri. More generically, I consistently stick with whatever I get redirect to - http or https, cool or uncool. Simple and safe. |
@nissimsan -- Though it may appear to be both, "[sticking] with whatever [you] get redirect [sic] to" is NEITHER simple nor safe. Browser redirection from the URI of a term being described, to the URI of the description of that term, does not imply in any way that the term being described is identified by the URI of the description of that term! |
The identifier of an entity being in the |
There are also the various kinds of HTTP redirection available. FWIW Schema.org's http: to https: redirections use "HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently". |
@danbri --
Are you saying that "you" (schema.org) mean (or meant) to identify two different entities by those two URIs (or really, any two URIs which differ only in their scheme, Or is the latter simply a newer identifier (a co-referer) for the same entity, as would communicated by putting an |
That would seem to support my assertion that |
On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 at 16:58, Ted Thibodeau Jr ***@***.***> wrote:
@danbri <https://github.com/danbri> --
However it is not clear what property to use to associate non-type,
non-property terms, e.g.
http://schema.org/AudiobookFormat and https://schema.org/AudiobookFormat
I am not convinced owl:sameAs works, as it is such as strong claim.
Are you saying that "you" (schema.org) mean (or meant) to identify two
different entities by those two URIs (or really, any two URIs which differ
only in their scheme, http vs https; note please I'm not talking about
*any* two schemes, where I agree, it's more complex)?
Or is the latter simply a newer identifier (a co-referer) for the *same*
entity, as would communicated by putting an owl:sameAs relation (in
either direction, i.e., in either description, though optimally it would be
in both) between them?
I am saying you can go either way on this stuff.
When Dublin Core moved from http://purl.org/dc/Creator to
http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator (or similar), ... were those two very
similar properties, or essentially the same one. There is no best practice
on this really.
I lean towards not spraying owl:sameAs around everywhere since it becomes
then to say different things about each of them, e.g.
http://schema.org/Person owl:sameAs https://schema.org/
means we can't usefully say
http://schema.org/Person schema:supersededBy https://schema.org/
For me it seems more useful to state which one is the currently preferred
one, rather than just to say they identify the same thing. It is good to
nudge things away from http:, unless something radical
<https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Security-NotTheS.html> happens.
|
(Not treating your last in order....) Well, I would hope you wouldn't spray these anywhere meant to be consumed as RDF --
First, this makes no sense to me, as written --
-- though perhaps you meant to write --
Likewise, perhaps you meant this --
-- to be written --
Now, if you are concerned about versioning -- whether of http://schema.org/ (or https://schema.org/) writ large (i.e., all terms therein), or of https://schema.org/Person writ small -- I think that has some validity. I think that validity is best addressed by identifying the "old" description which was superseded with some versioned URI which is linked from the "new" description which is identified by some other versioned URI. Dereferencing the un-versioned URI should, in my opinion, always lead to the latest/current description, which should include a link to at least the most-recent previous description (recursive, so each description links to the next-most-recent), if not to all previous descriptions. Dereferencing any versioned URI should lead to that version of the description, which optimally would include links to both more and less recent descriptions. Your example of --
It is unfortunate that many treat the URI of the HTML or other rendition of a description of a dereferenced URI (to which they may be routed by various |
The switch-over was done in 12.0 on 2021-03-08 (see https://schema.org/docs/releases.html). So I suggest not to sidetrack this issue with that other issue.
@OR13 what do you think? |
This isn't the schema.org repo... AFAIK, we updated all the references to use |
FWIW the last schema.org release contained this file, https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/blob/main/data/releases/14.0/httpequivs.ttl which asserts owl:equivalentClass and owl:equivalentProperty relationship between http: and https: term URIs. I don't think it has a treatment for Enumeration members. /cc @rjw p.s. yes sorry I had a typo in my earlier response to @TallTed And +1 to @OR13 re actionable issues. |
Hallelujah! Glad to hear it! (Hope I don't forget it!) |
@OR13 Please reopen this: it's a task to grep all schema.org terms and check them for existence in schema.org. Here's a first cut, collapsing cases already reported in other issues:
Attached: schema.txt |
@VladimirAlexiev - reopening. The floor is yours... :) |
@nissimsan Isn't anyone going to help with the list I made? |
Discussed on call, please review and indicate whether you are able to assist on this ticket. |
I suggest running the script and filing separate issues, and then closing this issue. Issues that are large and not actionable tend to not progress well. |
We do use |
@nissimsan The attachment shows 161 Here's a mistake: this lowercase term is a prop, so it cannot be used as
|
@VladimirAlexiev can you open a separate issue for this? #271 (comment) |
The first example in #270 has two more problems::
Purchase
can be semantically equivalent torelatedDocuments
: IMHO a Purchase is an eventThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: