This is the archive of the goodrelations dicussion list

Dear all:

While updating the GoodRelations test-cases at

   http://www.heppnetz.de/rdfa4google/testcases.html

which we normally use to monitor their validators, I found many examples of

1. using GoodRelations for both Yahoo and Google and
2. using extensions for specific verticals, e.g. http://purl.org/vso/ns.html for the auto industry, while still validating with Google AND Yahoo.

This shows that, internally, they can handle way more of RDFa and GoodRelations than publicly advertised to developers.

So when you want to publish rich data to please both search engines, mobile applications, and browser extensions, GoodRelations in RDFa is currently the best choice.

The only fundamental difference between Google's and Yahoo's recommendation for using GoodRelations is the markup for review data; they use two different vocabularies. But thanks to RDFa's flexibility, you can still use a single block of markup:

<div xmlns:review="http://purl.org/stuff/rev#"
	xmlns:v="http://rdf.data-vocabulary.org/#">
	 <br />Product Reviews:
	 <div rel="review:hasReview v:hasReview">
	   <span typeof="v:Review-aggregate review:Review">
		 <br />Average:
		 <span property="review:rating v:rating" datatype="xsd:float">4.5</span>, lowest:
		 <span property="review:minRating" datatype="xsd:integer">0</span>, highest:
		 <span property="review:maxRating" datatype="xsd:integer">5</span> (total number of reviews:
		 <span property="review:totalRatings v:count" datatype="xsd:integer">45</span>)<br />
	   </span>
	 </div>
</div>

Best wishes

Martin Hepp