Schema.org，Goodrelations-vocabulary.org和Productontology.org之间是什么关系? [英] What is the relation between Schema.org, Goodrelations-vocabulary.org and Productontology.org?

问题描述

Schema.org，Goodrelations-vocabulary.org和Productontology.org之间是什么关系?

Schema.org告知:"W3C schema.org社区组是该项目的主要论坛". Google，Microsoft，Yahoo和Yandex是创始公司.

Google，Microsoft，Yahoo和Yandex是否也接受Goodrelations-vocabulary.org和Productontology.org标准?如果不是，将它们用于将来是个好主意吗?

尽管Google没有提及，但我读到有关Google处理结构化数据的方法存在一些差异. Schema.org提供Microdata，Google提供application/ld + json等.

不可能说Google适合100％Schema.org.对于Microsoft，Yahoo和Yandex来说是否一样.

---

在Schema.org上没有结构化的方式来发布游艇宪章"，只有 http://www.productontology.org/doc/Yacht_charter ，但这还不是正式的(直到今天，2018年3月13日).

为游艇租赁业发布结构化数据的最佳方法是什么?

我们是否必须使用Offer，AggregateOffer或 http://www.productontology. org/doc/Yacht_charter ?

解决方案

词汇

Schema.org 定义主要用于Web/电子邮件内容的属性和类型.

GoodRelations 定义主要用于电子商务的属性和类型.

产品类型本体为英文Wikipedia文章描述的每个主要事物定义类型(无属性)

(请注意，Schema.org集成了GoodRelations的许多部分: Good Relations and Schema.org .)

当然还有更多的词汇，您也可以创建自己的词汇.

语法

所有这些词汇都是基于RDF的，因此它们可以用于任何RDF序列化中(例如 JSON-LD ， RDFa ， Microdata ，尽管它不是RDF序列化(但足够接近 ).

作者和消费者

结构化数据的作者决定要使用的词汇表和语法.

示例:

• 作者Stack Overflow在Q& A页面上使用了两个词汇表(Open Graph Protocol，Schema.org)和两个语法(Microdata，RDFa).

• 作者Tim Berners-Lee在

支持一个词汇表(Schema.org)和三种语法(JSON-LD，Microdata，RDFa).

• 消费者Gmail 支持一个词汇表(Schema.org )和Gmail动作/突出显示的两种语法(JSON-LD，微数据).

• 消费者Facebook 支持一个词汇表(开放图谱协议)和他们共享功能的一种语法(RDFa).

我的开始建议

• 使用词汇表Schema.org进行所有操作.这是最常用的词汇，由大型搜索引擎服务支持/赞助，适用于各种内容. p>

• 除了Schema.org的类型/属性外，还使用其他词汇 . Schema.org并未涵盖所有深度/领域.缺少的地方，使用合适的，更具体的词汇.

• 使用以下语法之一:JSON-LD，微数据，RDFa.请参阅有关比较微数据和RDFa .除非您已经知道这些语法之一，否则我建议使用RDFa(可以很容易地从HTML + RDFa文档自动生成JSON-LD，反之则不行).

因此，如果您提供游艇租赁服务，则可以使用以下方式:

 <section typeof="schema:Service http://www.productontology.org/id/Yacht_charter">
  <h2 property="schema:name">Yacht charter</h2>
</section>
 

它使用Schema.org中的 Service 类型(没有更具体的类型适用于游艇租赁服务，因此与Schema.org当前获得的服务一样具体)，以及 Yacht_charter 产品类型本体中的类型.

What is the relation between Schema.org, Goodrelations-vocabulary.org and Productontology.org?

Schema.org informs, "W3C schema.org Community Group is the main forum for the project". Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Yandex are founding companies.

Are Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Yandex accepting Goodrelations-vocabulary.org and Productontology.org standard as well? If not, is it good idea to use them for future?

Although Google did not mention, I read that there are some differences regarding Google approach to structured data. Schema.org offers Microdata, Google offers application/ld+json etc.

It is not possible to say Google suits to 100 % Schema.org. Is it same for Microsoft, Yahoo and Yandex.

---

There is no structured way to publish "Yacht Charter" at Schema.org, only way is http://www.productontology.org/doc/Yacht_charter, but this is not offical (till today 13.03.2018).

What is the best way to publish structured data for yacht charter industry?

Do we have to use Offer, AggregateOffer or http://www.productontology.org/doc/Yacht_charter?

解决方案

Vocabularies

Schema.org defines properties and types primarily for web/email content.

GoodRelations defines properties and types primarily for e-commerce.

The Product Types Ontology defines types (no properties) for every main thing described by an English Wikipedia article.

(Note that Schema.org integrated many parts of GoodRelations: Good Relations and Schema.org.)

Of course there are many more vocabularies, and you could create your own, too.

Syntaxes

All these vocabularies are RDF-based, so they can be used in any RDF serialization (like JSON-LD, RDFa, RDF/XML, Turtle etc.).

They could also be used in Microdata, although it’s not a RDF serialization (but close enough).

Authors and consumers

An author of the structured data decides which vocabularies and which syntaxes to use.

Examples:

• The author Stack Overflow uses two vocabularies (Open Graph Protocol, Schema.org) and two syntaxes (Microdata, RDFa) on a Q&A page.

• The author Tim Berners-Lee uses 14 vocabularies (Creative Commons, FOAF, DOAP, Solid, Geo, etc.) and one syntax (RDF/XML) in his card.

A consumer (a browser add-on, a stand-alone tool, a web application/service etc.) of the structured data decides which vocabularies and which syntaxes to support.

Examples:

• The consumer Google Search supports one vocabulary (Schema.org) and three syntaxes (JSON-LD, Microdata, RDFa) for their rich results.

• The consumer Gmail supports one vocabulary (Schema.org) and two syntaxes (JSON-LD, Microdata) for their Gmail Actions/Highlights.

• The consumer Facebook supports one vocabulary (Open Graph Protocol) and one syntax (RDFa) for their share feature.

My recommendation for starting

• Use the vocabulary Schema.org for everything. It’s the most used vocabulary, it’s supported/sponsored by the big search engine services, and it’s intended for all kind of content.

• Use other vocabularies in addition to the types/properties from Schema.org. Schema.org doesn’t cover all areas/domains in depth. Where it is lacking, use suitable, more specific vocabularies.

• Use one of these syntaxes: JSON-LD, Microdata, RDFa. See my answer about differences between JSON-LD, Microdata, and RDFa and my answer comparing Microdata and RDFa. Unless you already know one of these syntaxes, I would recommend to go with RDFa (JSON-LD can be easily generated automatically from a HTML+RDFa document, but not the other way around).

So if you provide a yacht charter service, you could use something like this:

<section typeof="schema:Service http://www.productontology.org/id/Yacht_charter">
  <h2 property="schema:name">Yacht charter</h2>
</section>

It uses the Service type from Schema.org (none of its more specific types apply to a yacht charter service, so this is as specific as Schema.org currently gets), and the Yacht_charter type from the Product Types Ontology.

这篇关于Schema.org，Goodrelations-vocabulary.org和Productontology.org之间是什么关系?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！