From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Tue Aug 17 21:57:41 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:57:41 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Yahoo integration with Bing: Impact on GoodRelations Markup Message-ID: <820E0188-E89C-4572-88B6-7E84E71C495E@ebusiness-unibw.org> Dear all: Many of you have waited for a definite answer on what will happen to Yahoo's support of GoodRelations markup to enhance organic search results. Here is Yahoo's official announcement: http://developer.yahoo.net/blog/archives/2010/08/api_updates_and_changes.html In a nutshell (as expected), the free SearchMonkey development environment and the Yahoo BOSS API will be closed or much more restricted soon. But the good thing is that despite the fundamental change to Yahoo search technology (now relying on Bing's main index), they kept fetching and storing GoodRelations markup and will continue to augment the rendering of your page in the organic search results, if GoodRelations markup is available in the page: Quote: "Yahoo! Search results pages will continue to show enhanced result templates from websites? page markup and structured data feeds along with Microsoft?s organic listings." So Yahoo's support for GoodRelations has survived a very critical time in Yahoo's history. Best wishes Martin Hepp -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Wed Aug 18 10:19:34 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:19:34 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] vcard:tel used incorrectly in the Quickstart Guide In-Reply-To: <1276789162.5991.27.camel@midgard> References: <1276458151.3258.8.camel@midgard> <4C1A341A.2050706@ebusiness-unibw.org> <1276789162.5991.27.camel@midgard> Message-ID: Hi Vasiliy, Apologies for the late reply. See inline comments. On 17.06.2010, at 17:39, Vasiliy Faronov wrote: > Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: >> You are right, the use of tel as a plain datatype property is in >> partial >> violation of the latest 2010 vcard ontology spec. However, we >> currently >> recommend to stick with the Yahoo vcard representation pattern, since >> that is necessary for augmented rendering of phone numbers in Yahoo. > > Thanks Martin, that explains it. > > But the previous version[1] of the spec, 9 years old, has the same > usage > of vcard:tel as the current one. So basically Yahoo is at fault for > incorrectly interpreting the spec? > > Anyway, this discrepancy should at least be mentioned somewhere in the > Quickstart guide, as a footnote perhaps. Added. See http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelationsQuickstart#Remarks > > >> PS: IMO, SPARQL queries must tolerate a bit of deviation from >> standards. > > When a deviant pattern is widespread, yes, clients practically have to > do some workarounds. Similarly, when it's necessary to cope with > widely > used but misbehaving clients (as is apparently the case here with > vcard:tel), workarounds on the server side are of course acceptable, > but, if at all possible, they should be used *together with* correct > markup, not in its stead. > > For example, if one were to do it like this: > > [] vcard:tel > "+1 234 56 78" , > [ rdf:value "+1 234 56 78" ] . > > would both Yahoo and spec-compliant consumers be happy? Yes, but there are two arguments that stop me from recommending that at this point: 1. It blows up the size of markup. Implementing this in RDFa adds a whole lot of complexity for the casual coder. Keeping markup to the minimum is really important for widespread adoption. In fact, the impact of RDFa on page loading times has been a frequent concern by SEO experts. Fortunately, we were able to show that our trimmed recipes cause less than 1 % increase in typical page loading times. 2. The markup would be an obvious contradiction, since the vcard:tel property would be used as an object property and a datatype property in parallel. > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-vcard-rdf-20010222/#5 > > -- > Vasiliy Faronov > > From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Wed Aug 18 12:36:39 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:36:39 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Access Control and GoodRelations Data Message-ID: Dear all: There may be scenarios in which you cannot or do not want to expose all information expressed using GoodRelations to the general public. Typical examples are reseller discounts, price lists for restricted audiences, or data about what products you own (gr:owns) or seek (gr:seeks). In principle, you can use any established HTTP-based access control technique for managing access to such data. For example, you could require user credentials for accessing the resource containing the reseller price-list. Still, mixing the public data (e.g. product features) with private data (e.g. reseller prices) is simple, as long as the same objects use the same URIs. For a more distributed scenario, I highly recommend looking into the evolving WebID specification (formely FOAF+SSL) at http://payswarm.com/webid/ There is a bit of additional information already on the following Wiki page: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/AccessControl4GoodRelations Best wishes Martin Hepp -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Tue Aug 24 15:04:40 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 15:04:40 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Canonical URIs for Products in Shop Software / GoodRelations Message-ID: Dear all: Some shop applications, unfortunately, display the very same item at multiple URIs. This is problematic for Search Engine Optimization (SEO) and the Web of Data alike. Examples and Causes =================== There are two typical causes: a) The navigation path of the shop system is used to create "clean" URIs: http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123 http://www.myshop.com/featured-items/green_pocket_stapler123 b) Parameters, e.g. such to control the language of the output, the preferred currency, the session ID (bad...), or the referrer. This case is more severe, because it can easily cause 10 - 100 duplicates per single page: http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123 http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123?lang=en http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123?currency=usd? lang=en http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123?referrer=clicksale Problems ======== 1. If you embed GoodRelations data markup in RDFa syntax to your HTML/ XHTML shop templates, this may cause a massive duplication of data elements for applications that are trying to consume our shop data. 2. This will reduce the findability of your items in GoodRelations- aware applications. 3. It spoils the Web of Data ("proliferation of URIs"). 4. Your pages will receive a lower ranking in search engines, because the amount of links will be spread over multiple URIs. 5. Pages may even be banned from search engines ("duplication of content"); that is independent of whether you are using GoodRelations or not. 6. Crawlers will waste more resources crawling your site, consume more of your valuable bandwidth, and are more likely to use outdated cached versions of your pages. Solutions ========= 1. The ideal solution is to aim for canonical URIs (one URI per product) as much as possible. This may not be easy for pattern a), but it is straightforward for case b), e.g. by using session cookies and / or HTTP redirects. 2. If that is not possible, you should use *absolute* instead of *relative* identifiers in RDFa for all major data elements ("about" attribute in RDFa). For example, in the template for the "product item" page, use
... instead of
... The effect will be that no matter from which URI the page was actually requested, the same RDF data will be extracted. It requires, though, that you can determine the canonical URI of the page at the time of the request. 3. The last option (but the least powerful, yet still much better than doing nothing) is to add owl:sameAs statements from the RDFa pattern to the canonical URI. The canonical URI should also be used for the foaf:page property, which is the crucial link from the data to the page from where the product can be ordered. Example:
...
Best wishes Martin Hepp -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Tue Aug 24 15:38:57 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 15:38:57 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Canonical URIs for Products in Shop Software / GoodRelations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Minor correction: Problem No. 5: > 5. Pages may even be banned from search engines ("duplication of > content"); that is independent of whether you are using > GoodRelations or not. is not relevant for Google, at least, see http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/09/demystifying-duplicate-content-penalty.html Best Martin Hepp On 24.08.2010, at 15:04, Martin Hepp wrote: > Dear all: > > Some shop applications, unfortunately, display the very same item at > multiple URIs. This is problematic for Search Engine Optimization > (SEO) and the Web of Data alike. > > Examples and Causes > =================== > > There are two typical causes: > > a) The navigation path of the shop system is used to create "clean" > URIs: > > http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123 > http://www.myshop.com/featured-items/green_pocket_stapler123 > > b) Parameters, e.g. such to control the language of the output, the > preferred currency, the session ID (bad...), or the referrer. > This case is more severe, because it can easily cause 10 - 100 > duplicates per single page: > > http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123 > http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123?lang=en > http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123?currency=usd? > lang=en > http://www.myshop.com/staplers/green_pocket_stapler123?referrer=clicksale > > > Problems > ======== > 1. If you embed GoodRelations data markup in RDFa syntax to your > HTML/XHTML shop templates, this may cause a massive duplication of > data elements for applications that are trying to consume our shop > data. > 2. This will reduce the findability of your items in GoodRelations- > aware applications. > 3. It spoils the Web of Data ("proliferation of URIs"). > 4. Your pages will receive a lower ranking in search engines, > because the amount of links will be spread over multiple URIs. > 5. Pages may even be banned from search engines ("duplication of > content"); that is independent of whether you are using > GoodRelations or not. > 6. Crawlers will waste more resources crawling your site, consume > more of your valuable bandwidth, and are more likely to use outdated > cached versions of your pages. > > Solutions > ========= > 1. The ideal solution is to aim for canonical URIs (one URI per > product) as much as possible. This may not be easy for pattern a), > but it is straightforward for case b), e.g. by using session cookies > and / or HTTP redirects. > > 2. If that is not possible, you should use *absolute* instead of > *relative* identifiers in RDFa for all major data elements ("about" > attribute in RDFa). > > For example, in the template for the "product item" page, use > >
> ... > > instead of > >
> ... > > The effect will be that no matter from which URI the page was > actually requested, the same RDF data will be extracted. It > requires, though, that you can determine the canonical URI of the > page at the time of the request. > > 3. The last option (but the least powerful, yet still much better > than doing nothing) is to add owl:sameAs statements from the RDFa > pattern to the canonical URI. > The canonical URI should also be used for the foaf:page property, > which is the crucial link from the data to the page from where the > product can be ordered. > > Example: > >
>
>
xml:lang="en">
> ... >
>
>
> > Best wishes > > Martin Hepp > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > martin hepp > e-business & web science research group > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen > > e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org > phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 > fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 > www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) > http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) > skype: mfhepp > twitter: mfhepp > > Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! > ================================================================= > * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ > * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr > * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 > * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations > * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr > * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks > * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos > From semantics at 0x1b.com Tue Aug 24 20:12:16 2010 From: semantics at 0x1b.com (Ed - 0x1b, Inc.) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:12:16 -0700 Subject: [goodrelations] Canonical URIs for Products in Shop Software / GoodRelations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:04 AM, Martin Hepp wrote: > Dear all: > > Some shop applications, unfortunately, display the very same item at > multiple URIs. This is problematic for Search Engine Optimization > (SEO) and the Web of Data alike. > regarding: > 3. The last option (but the least powerful, yet still much better than > doing nothing) is to add owl:sameAs statements from the RDFa pattern > to the canonical URI. > The canonical URI should also be used for the foaf:page property, > which is the crucial link from the data to the page from where the > product can be ordered. > > Example: > > ?
> ? ?
> ? ?
xml:lang="en">
> ... > ? ?
> ?
>
> Is it better to have the sameAs reference a parallel canonical URI - like a SPARQL endpoint - unrelated to the website topography (is this option #2?). Or is there a way to publish all product URI with sameAs patterns such that the first discovered is taken as the canonical URI for any following duplicate URI? The objective would be to remove the web of maintenance from using the sameAs pattern. Thanks for all the GoodRelations - Ed From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Tue Aug 24 22:18:27 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 22:18:27 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Canonical URIs for Products in Shop Software / GoodRelations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ed, > Is it better to have the sameAs reference a parallel canonical URI - > like a SPARQL endpoint - unrelated to the website topography (is this > option #2?). In general, I recommend to make hash URIs based on URIs of the human- readable HTML page the authoritative ones, as long as the pages contain RDFa markup. By that, you always refer someone who is trying to dereference a data entity (e.g. an offer or a product) to a resource that can serve both human-readable and machine-readable content. Even if you provide data dumps (e.g. in RDF/XML) or SPARQL endpoints, I usually suggest to use the URI references derived from the authoritative Web pages. It is essential to understand that this design choice influences the URI which will be tried for fetching information about the data object. So if you serve both a data dump in RDF/XML and RDFa in shop pages, I suggest to use the URIs resulting from parsing the RDFa also for the RDF/XML data. The HTML+RDFa and RDF/XML templates at http://code.google.com/p/templates4goodrelations/ also follow that approach. If interested in the details, please compare the output of the data dump file with the individual page markup. > Or is there a way to publish all product URI with sameAs > patterns such that the first discovered is taken as the canonical URI > for any following duplicate URI? The objective would be to remove the > web of maintenance from using the sameAs pattern. As I tried to express, the sameAs approach is the weakest, for it will still require crawling the same content from multiple URIs in order to consolidate all URI variants. Still, it is much better than nothing, because otherwise, a dataspace operator would have to rely on imperfect heuristics for entity consolidation. > Thanks for all the GoodRelations - Ed Thanks! Best Martin On 24.08.2010, at 20:12, Ed - 0x1b, Inc. wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:04 AM, Martin Hepp > wrote: >> Dear all: >> >> Some shop applications, unfortunately, display the very same item at >> multiple URIs. This is problematic for Search Engine Optimization >> (SEO) and the Web of Data alike. >> > > regarding: > >> 3. The last option (but the least powerful, yet still much better >> than >> doing nothing) is to add owl:sameAs statements from the RDFa pattern >> to the canonical URI. >> The canonical URI should also be used for the foaf:page property, >> which is the crucial link from the data to the page from where the >> product can be ordered. >> >> Example: >> >>
>>
>>
> xml:lang="en">
>> ... >>
>>
>>
>> > > Is it better to have the sameAs reference a parallel canonical URI - > like a SPARQL endpoint - unrelated to the website topography (is this > option #2?). Or is there a way to publish all product URI with sameAs > patterns such that the first discovered is taken as the canonical URI > for any following duplicate URI? The objective would be to remove the > web of maintenance from using the sameAs pattern. > > Thanks for all the GoodRelations - Ed From giovanni.tummarello at deri.org Wed Aug 25 17:06:18 2010 From: giovanni.tummarello at deri.org (Giovanni Tummarello) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 17:06:18 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Piggibacking opengraph markup of mountain restaurant/b&b Message-ID: Hi Martin, all how would you mark this up? http://www.agriturismotrentino.com/it/SC/2007/SID/311/AGRITUR_DUE_VALLI.html its easy to tell them to do so if they get something back e.g. the "i like it" facebook button. Can we inhance that RDFa or use it as a substrate? its good to explain them the benefits etc. opengraph has indeed most that's needed, but would need something extra as they have richer data e.g. services Would it make sense to write a document which starts from opengraph and call it OpenGraphEcommerce (powered by good relations?) Gio -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Wed Aug 25 17:41:20 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 17:41:20 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] Piggybacking opengraph markup of mountain restaurant/b&b In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8781E275-2C84-493C-AB06-C0BA66CA6531@ebusiness-unibw.org> Hi Giovanni: For a hotel, you can use the standard GoodRelations elements. A more specific page for accommodation patterns is in the making at http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelationsHotels It will be complemented by an ontology for room features etc. As for OpenGraph: Basically, combining OpenGraph markup with GoodRelations is straightforward: - Add OpenGraph meta-data to the page header - Add GoodRelations meta-data to the body of the document. I do not yet have a complete example for that, but it is really about combining http://developers.facebook.com/docs/opengraph with http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelationsQuickstart in one page. The basic principle is explained in http://www.slideshare.net/mhepp/web-page-optimization-for-facebook There is no need to change neither OpenGraph nor GoodRelations, they should work perfectly in parallel (except for a small amount of data redundancy, yet irrelevant from the maintenance point of view for dynamic Web sites). Best Martin On 25.08.2010, at 17:06, Giovanni Tummarello wrote: > Hi Martin, all > > how would you mark this up? http://www.agriturismotrentino.com/it/SC/2007/SID/311/AGRITUR_DUE_VALLI.html > > its easy to tell them to do so if they get something back e.g. the > "i like it" facebook button. > > Can we inhance that RDFa or use it as a substrate? its good to > explain them the benefits etc. > opengraph has indeed most that's needed, but would need something > extra as they have richer data e.g. services > > Would it make sense to write a document which starts from opengraph > and call it OpenGraphEcommerce (powered by good relations?) > Gio -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Mon Aug 30 19:25:41 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:25:41 +0200 Subject: [goodrelations] ANN: The Vehicle Sales Ontology - Cars, Bikes, Boats on the Web of Data - http://purl.org/vso/ns Message-ID: <23E595EA-9254-4037-BCD1-EFA5899FAFB9@ebusiness-unibw.org> Dear all: I am happy to announce the first mature release of the Vehicle Sales Ontology [1], a GoodRelations-compliant [2,3] Web vocabulary for - Cars, - Bikes, - Boats, - etc. on the Web of Data. It can be used by car listing sites, bike or canoe rental services and the like. In combination with - http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#owns and - http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#seeks , it is also possible to expose ownership ("I own a Volkswagen Golf") as part of online identity data or purchasing interest ("I am looking for a canoe"). The ontology recommends DBPedia resource URIs as predefined qualitative values as much as possible. Any feedback is very welcome. Best wishes Martin [1] http://purl.org/vso/ns [2] http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 [3] http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/Own_GoodRelations_Vocabularies -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-mail: mhepp at computer.org www: http://www.heppnetz.de/ skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos