From gerald_leroy at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  1 11:33:26 2013
From: gerald_leroy at yahoo.com (Gerald LeRoy)
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 02:33:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [goodrelations] question re: OpeningHoursSpecification
Message-ID: <1385894006.36304.YahooMailNeo@web140005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Hello,

I looked through the spec and also through the email archives but couldn't find the answer to this question.

Can anyone help?

The code block below validates with no errors in the Good Relations Validator.

However when the code block is run through the Google Structured Data Testing Tool, the following error is returned:
"Error: "name" field in ProductOrServicesSomeInstancesPlaceholder / ProductOrServicesModel is required."

<div itemprop="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasOpeningHoursSpecification" itemscope 
?????? itemtype="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#OpeningHoursSpecification">
Opening hours: Mo-Fri,
???? <link itemprop="hasOpeningHoursDayOfWeek" 
?????????? href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Monday" />
???? <link itemprop="hasOpeningHoursDayOfWeek" 
?????????? href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Tuesday" />
???? <link itemprop="hasOpeningHoursDayOfWeek" 
?????????? href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Wednesday" />
???? <link itemprop="hasOpeningHoursDayOfWeek" 
?????????? href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Thursday" />
???? <link itemprop="hasOpeningHoursDayOfWeek" 
?????????? href="http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#Friday" />
???? <meta itemprop="opens" content="09:00:00">9:00 a.m. -
???? <meta itemprop="closes" content="18:00:00">6:00 p.m.
? </div>

The error goes way when I insert this as the second line:
<span itemprop="name">The City Reader</span>

I'd rather not have to insert this new text to get the code to validate.? Is there a way to get the code above to validate without having to add new text?

Thanks,

Gerald
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/attachments/20131201/53b27f82/attachment.html>

From uschold at gmail.com  Mon Dec  2 08:40:21 2013
From: uschold at gmail.com (Michael F Uschold)
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 23:40:21 -0800
Subject: [goodrelations] goodrelations Digest, Vol 59, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3.1385636407.13368.goodrelations@ebusiness-unibw.org>
References: <mailman.3.1385636407.13368.goodrelations@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Message-ID: <CADfiEMODk7q_XQoN89SSYPsgqtjG3yOHEaBUbApeACndhyc5rA@mail.gmail.com>

Per Martins comment:
> > since such URIs designate the *class* of all instances of concrete (in
this sense: particles), but you need an individual (in OWL) to express
"concrete" as a type of material.

This is definitely true if you want to stay in OWL DL.  If you are OK with
using OWL-Full, you probably could go ahead and use the existing class for
concrete as the value of the property.  Staying in OWL DL has the advantage
of doing inference more efficiently.  I'm not aware of anyone running DL
provers over Goodrelations product data. so this might not matter.  If you
go the OWL DL route, you end up doing one of the following neither being
particularly nice.

Having two URIs that essentially mean the same thing:
1. a class "Concrete" whose instances are quantiies of actual concrete, and
which really means  the type of material that is concrete, in the same way
that the classs "Car" means the type of thing that is a car.
2. an individual that means the type of material that is concrete.

-OR-
Having two ways to relate an thing to the type of thing it is.
1. The standard way is to use rdf:type.
2. But if you create an individual as Martin suggests, and if you want to
have any instances of the concrete, then you cannot use rdf:type, you have
to make up another object property that means the same thing (e.g.
hasType), but that does not have the benefits of built in inference that
you get with rdf:type.

Any of these things work, you have to decide which one makes the most sense
for your situation.

More on this kind of thing in this note:
http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-classes-as-values/

Michael


On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 3:00 AM,
<goodrelations-request at ebusiness-unibw.org>wrote:

> Send goodrelations mailing list submissions to
>         goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         goodrelations-request at ebusiness-unibw.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         goodrelations-owner at ebusiness-unibw.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of goodrelations digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Defining material types (David Deering)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:41:05 -0600
> From: David Deering <david at touchpointdigital.net>
> To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org>
> Cc: goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> Subject: Re: [goodrelations] Defining material types
> Message-ID: <52960481.8070405 at touchpointdigital.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> Thank you, Martin, I appreciate the direction and the example.  And yes,
> I'd definitely be in favor of seeing a "material" or "madeOf" property
> added to GoodRelations and schema.org, as this would help webmasters
> define even more precisely certain elements on their pages.  Thanks.
>
> David Deering
>
>
> On 11/26/2013 11:25 AM, Martin Hepp wrote:
> > Hi David:
> >
> > First, you need a property for the "material" relationship between a
> product and its material.
> >
> > You could either define one yourself in your own namespace, as described
> here:
> >
> >      http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Documentation/Extensions
> >
> > # Defining the property
> > foo:material
> >      a owl:ObjectProperty ;
> >      rdfs:domain gr:ProductOrService ;
> >      rdfs:range schema:Thing ;
> >      rdfs:subPropertyOf gr:qualitativeProductOrServiceProperty .
> >
> > Or you could reuse one from other GoodRelations extensions from this
> list:
> >
> >      http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Vocabularies
> >
> > e.g. the FreeClassOWL ontology at
> >
> >      http://www.freeclass.eu/freeclass_v1
> >
> > has the property
> >
> >      http://www.freeclass.eu/freeclass_v1.html#P_E67 ("base material").
> >
> > Then you need to model the material. You CANNOT directly use
> www.productontology.org URIs, like
> >
> >      http://www.productontology.org/id/Concrete
> >
> > since such URIs designate the *class* of all instances of concrete (in
> this sense: particles), but you need an individual (in OWL) to express
> "concrete" as a type of material.
> >
> > The most straightforward way is using DBPedia URIs whenever you need
> individuals and www.productontology.org URIs when you need types or
> classes.
> >
> > The full pattern would be
> >
> > # Describing a product
> >
> > @prefix gr: <http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#> .
> > @prefix pto: <http://www.productontology.org/id/> .
> > @prefix dbpedia: <http://dbpedia.org/resource/> .
> > @prefix foo: <http://example.com/> .
> >
> > foo:ConcreteTube a gr:ProductOrService, gr:Individual ;
> >       a pto:Tube_(fluid_conveyance) ; # It is a tube
> >       gr:name "A single tube made from concrete" ;
> >       foo:material dbpedia:Concrete. # It is made from concrete.
> >
> > That should do the trick.
> >
> > We will consider adding a madeOf or material property to GoodRelations
> and propose it to schema.org.
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > On Nov 26, 2013, at 5:53 PM, David Deering wrote:
> >
> >> I have been doing some research and so far have been unable to find the
> answer, so I am hoping that I might be able to get some help here.  My
> question is: Is there a way to define a product's material type, such as
> glass, stone, wood, etc?  I have searched schema.org, GoodRelations, and
> investigated using productontology.org, but none seem to provide a means
> to define the property of product material. Wikipedia does not, for
> example, have a page for "glass vase", so it would seem that for that
> particular case, the productontology markup would not work.  Unless the
> markup can somehow be extended?  Does anyone have any thoughts or advice?
>  It would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks.
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> goodrelations mailing list
> >> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> >> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > 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/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/attachments/20131127/4f4a527c/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> goodrelations mailing list
> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations
>
>
> End of goodrelations Digest, Vol 59, Issue 3
> ********************************************
>



-- 

Michael Uschold
   Senior Ontology Consultant, Semantic Arts
   http://www.semanticarts.com
   LinkedIn: http://tr.im/limfu
   Skype, Twitter: UscholdM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/attachments/20131201/f4588a01/attachment.html>

From perpetual-tripper at wwelves.org  Wed Dec 18 13:36:19 2013
From: perpetual-tripper at wwelves.org (=?UTF-8?B?4piuIGVsZiBQYXZsaWsg4piu?=)
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 13:36:19 +0100
Subject: [goodrelations] stating conditions on generic demands
Message-ID: <52B196C3.3070600@wwelves.org>

Hello,

Looking at http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Cookbook/Seeks

Makes me wonder how do I express a generic demand for which other peers 
can offer different products/services to satisfy it, and meet clearly 
stated conditions of meeting this demand.

For a practical example, I *seek* some way to travel Berlin -> Paris
I can accept:
* rideshare
* busfare
* trainfare

I do NOT accept:
* airfare

Another one, we *seek* someone to provide food for an event and would 
like to specify that we accept only offers for *vegan* and *fair trade* 
food.

It can also come very handy while looking for restaurants friendly for:
* gluten free
* fair trade
* raw food
etc.

I think in direction of what I understand people in VRM[1] community 
refer to as *intent casting*. Shortly explained by Doc Searls in this 
3min video: https://vimeo.com/53576832

Thank you for suggestions!

[1] http://projectvrm.net - Vendor Relationship Management



From perpetual-tripper at wwelves.org  Sat Dec 28 18:20:35 2013
From: perpetual-tripper at wwelves.org (=?UTF-8?B?4piuIGVsZiBQYXZsaWsg4piu?=)
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 18:20:35 +0100
Subject: [goodrelations] GoodRelations and Web Payments (aka. Payswarm)
Message-ID: <52BF0863.90602@wwelves.org>

I've just watched a video by Manu Sporny on generating and registering 
Asset & Listing for Web Payments: http://youtu.be/n5KBw7K65hg

I tried searching http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org for terms 
*asset*, *listing* with no results and payswarm giving just two:
* http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Changelog/20110401
* http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Events/ISWC2012

I wonder if some way of aligning between Web Payments and GoodRelations 
terms exists?

https://web-payments.org/specs/source/vocabs/payswarm
http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html

I also notice gr:PaySwarm as subclass of gr:PaymentMethod in range of
gr:acceptedPaymentMethods

Wouldn't at least those terms somehow map to each other:
gr:ProductOrService <-> payswarm:Asset
gr:Offering <-> payswarm:Listing

GoodRelations terms already got included in schema.org and maybe Web 
Payments could somehow reuse/extend them:
http://schema.org/Product
http://schema.org/Offer | http://schema.org/Demand

Otherwise publishers may need to mark things as both?
Product & Asset
Offer & Listing

Thanks for help with clarifying it!



From melvincarvalho at gmail.com  Sat Dec 28 18:52:27 2013
From: melvincarvalho at gmail.com (Melvin Carvalho)
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 18:52:27 +0100
Subject: [goodrelations] GoodRelations and Web Payments (aka. Payswarm)
In-Reply-To: <52BF0863.90602@wwelves.org>
References: <52BF0863.90602@wwelves.org>
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJDkv2EqRbpGjiJw=ztQjtsokOgo6z0w_cxu9R6Mc+4xQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 28 December 2013 18:20, ? elf Pavlik ? <perpetual-tripper at wwelves.org>wrote:

> I've just watched a video by Manu Sporny on generating and registering
> Asset & Listing for Web Payments: http://youtu.be/n5KBw7K65hg
>
> I tried searching http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org for terms
> *asset*, *listing* with no results and payswarm giving just two:
> * http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Changelog/20110401
> * http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Events/ISWC2012
>
> I wonder if some way of aligning between Web Payments and GoodRelations
> terms exists?
>
> https://web-payments.org/specs/source/vocabs/payswarm
> http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html
>
> I also notice gr:PaySwarm as subclass of gr:PaymentMethod in range of
> gr:acceptedPaymentMethods
>
> Wouldn't at least those terms somehow map to each other:
> gr:ProductOrService <-> payswarm:Asset
> gr:Offering <-> payswarm:Listing
>

One slight difference is that, afaik, GR uses a 3 letter ISO for currency,
whereas web payments also allows anyURI, which allows things like virtual
currencies to be part of a system.

So depending on your use cases, it might be that one vocab, is easier to
work with than another.  Of course, the beauty of the semantic web is that
you can mix and match to meet your needs.


>
> GoodRelations terms already got included in schema.org and maybe Web
> Payments could somehow reuse/extend them:
> http://schema.org/Product
> http://schema.org/Offer | http://schema.org/Demand
>
> Otherwise publishers may need to mark things as both?
> Product & Asset
> Offer & Listing
>
> Thanks for help with clarifying it!
>
> _______________________________________________
> goodrelations mailing list
> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/attachments/20131228/44e5d1e1/attachment.html>

From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org  Tue Dec 31 19:08:44 2013
From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp)
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 19:08:44 +0100
Subject: [goodrelations] GoodRelations and Web Payments (aka. Payswarm)
In-Reply-To: <CAKaEYhJDkv2EqRbpGjiJw=ztQjtsokOgo6z0w_cxu9R6Mc+4xQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52BF0863.90602@wwelves.org>
	<CAKaEYhJDkv2EqRbpGjiJw=ztQjtsokOgo6z0w_cxu9R6Mc+4xQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5CBDB5A2-C85C-405D-B83F-BD2414E7F96F@ebusiness-unibw.org>

Hi all:
Quick answer: The textual definitions in GoodRelations will soon be polished to reflect the fact that the compensation for a certain offer can include non-monetary assets (e.g. barter trade). Also note that gr:ProductOrService is not disjoint from any other class in GoodRelations, so it is perfectly okay to e.g. offer a gr:Location for sale etc.

Martin

On Dec 28, 2013, at 6:52 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On 28 December 2013 18:20, ? elf Pavlik ? <perpetual-tripper at wwelves.org> wrote:
> I've just watched a video by Manu Sporny on generating and registering Asset & Listing for Web Payments: http://youtu.be/n5KBw7K65hg
> 
> I tried searching http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org for terms *asset*, *listing* with no results and payswarm giving just two:
> * http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Changelog/20110401
> * http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Events/ISWC2012
> 
> I wonder if some way of aligning between Web Payments and GoodRelations terms exists?
> 
> https://web-payments.org/specs/source/vocabs/payswarm
> http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html
> 
> I also notice gr:PaySwarm as subclass of gr:PaymentMethod in range of
> gr:acceptedPaymentMethods
> 
> Wouldn't at least those terms somehow map to each other:
> gr:ProductOrService <-> payswarm:Asset
> gr:Offering <-> payswarm:Listing
> 
> One slight difference is that, afaik, GR uses a 3 letter ISO for currency, whereas web payments also allows anyURI, which allows things like virtual currencies to be part of a system.
> 
> So depending on your use cases, it might be that one vocab, is easier to work with than another.  Of course, the beauty of the semantic web is that you can mix and match to meet your needs.
>  
> 
> GoodRelations terms already got included in schema.org and maybe Web Payments could somehow reuse/extend them:
> http://schema.org/Product
> http://schema.org/Offer | http://schema.org/Demand
> 
> Otherwise publishers may need to mark things as both?
> Product & Asset
> Offer & Listing
> 
> Thanks for help with clarifying it!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> goodrelations mailing list
> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations
> 
> _______________________________________________
> goodrelations mailing list
> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations

--------------------------------------------------------
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/