2

We use Schema.org 'types' and 'properties' to organize many kinds of data. The application is driven by the vocab and structure of Schema.org, rather than it uses schema.org for SEO. The application structures and relates finished and unfinished works of creative people like scientists, artists, composers etc. Their efforts are not limited to "Creative works" such as articles and artworks, but include also organizations, companies, events and products initiated by them.

Starting this year, we use Schema.org because we had problems in semantic structuring our data in the past. Now we are using Schema.org we make good progress.

For each item that we collect we use name and description (Thing properties) as descriptive fields. To be even more elobarate we want to add headline and alternativeHeadline or a similar Schema.org vocab for each item we store in our database.

The following default property list would be adequate for all the items our application deals with:

  • name
  • headline
  • alternativeHeadline
  • description
  • image (non-descriptive)
  • url (non-descriptive)

For all types derived from schema.org/CreativeWork the properties headline and alternativeHeadline match schema.org, but, for example, Event or Product do not have these properties. We could use the Thing properties alternateName or about, but these properties are obviously not equivalents of headline and alternativeHeadline.

In short: We look for a uniform way to add four basic descriptive fields to each item in our application, regardless its type. What would be the best solution?

Schema.org - Application Perspective

iep
  • 601
  • 1
  • 8
  • 23
  • 1
    1) Do you publish the structured data, or do you use these properties only internally? 2) Would it be possible for you to use other vocabularies in addition to Schema.org? 3) With "descriptive", you mean that the value is a string instead of a URL? 4) What kind of data do you want to provide (in `headline` and `alternativeHeadline`) for e.g. an `Event`? – unor Dec 19 '17 at 17:03
  • 1
    @unor 1) The structured data is used internally and it *might* be exposed in many cases. 2) We prefer to use Schema.org vocab only. 3) With "descriptive" I mean "free text" which describes the "thing" involved; not an URL. 4) The kind of data we want to provide for e.g. an `Event` is like: `name`="The Entangled Universe"; `headline`="Exploring the extraordinary capabilities of the human mind"; `alternativeHeadline`="An event hosted by the University of Amsterdam". – iep Dec 19 '17 at 17:43
  • 1
    @unor Yesterday I had to answer your questions on my mobile. Today I created an image which might give you a clear perspective on what we are trying to achieve. The application is targeted to collect finished and unfinished work of creative professionals such as writers, artists, academics. The point is: they do not only produce creative works, but also events, organizations, etc.; events and organizations are creative heritages. We need to create a uniform model for the "headings" of all our records for later use (i.e. "presentation") in a `header` or `section` tag in HTML. – iep Dec 20 '17 at 09:47

1 Answers1

1

I wouldn’t recommend to use only the Schema.org vocabulary. It’s not Schema.org’s goal to provide properties for all cases. It’s intended that authors use more specific vocabularies where needed.

Being RDF-based, it’s easily possible to use many different vocabularies for your data: schema:name for Schema.org’s name property, foaf:name for FOAF’s name property.

And this also allows you to use your own vocabulary for cases where you don’t find a suitable property.

The rest of this answer assumes that you have to use Schema.org for everything.

I don’t think that using headline/alternativeHeadline for Event or Organization makes sense. What is the headline of a company? What is the alternative headline of an event? While some might have an idea, there would most likely be no broad agreement, everyone would use it differently; so consumers wouldn’t know what to expect, rendering this property useless.

From your Organization example, I get the impression that you use these properties for something like a tagline/slogan/motto/catchphrase. It might or might not make sense for Schema.org to provide a property for such a purpose, but it shouldn’t be headline.

In the absence of such suitable properties, I would say that the content you have used headline/alternativeHeadline for should be either part of name or description.

Taking the Event as example:

  • The headline could become part of the name: "The Entangled Universe: The extraordinary capabilities of the humand mind".
  • The alternativeHeadline could be omitted, because it just gives the event location in prose, while this information is already conveyed to consumers with location. If the sentence really has to be part of the structured data (and not just displayed on the page), then it could be included in the description.

With the old extension mechanism, you could generate more specific properties based on existing properties. But it’s deprecated, and I wouldn’t recommend publishing data with such properties. But it might still be useful for internal use, as it allows you to use separate fields. For example, you could use properties like name/subtitle, description/where, or description/slogan.

unor
  • 92,415
  • 26
  • 211
  • 360
  • Your answer is very much appreciated. Thank you for identifying some of my examples as 'prose', 'slogan', 'catchphrase', etc. Also, your remark that a property would render useless if consumers wouldn't know *exactly* what to expect from it, is great help. I think we should decide just to use '(alternative)headLine' when it is a property of a type. Thank you for your time and detailed answer. – iep Jan 23 '18 at 12:50
  • This is a real heads-up: **"It’s not Schema.org’s goal to provide properties for all cases. *It’s intended that authors use more specific vocabularies where needed*.**" Although this means I have to do more more research into the topic, now I read the links you provided, your advice is clearly pointing to the very right direction. Vocabularies and semantic web standards are pretty though to grasp in full context, but your answers are very much adding to understanding it, and are substantial at the same time. Thank you. – iep Jan 23 '18 at 14:32
  • I added a new question pretty much related to this one: https://stackoverflow.com/q/48582168/5021680 . – iep Feb 02 '18 at 11:59