I have to model a product, which has properties that aren't listed in the Schema.org Product type. After seeking in many places, I didn't find anything that fits to my need.
How can I extend the Schema.org Product type?
You could always use other vocabularies (that offer the properties you need) in addition to Schema.org. But if you want to use only the vocabulary Schema.org, you have two options in general:
Propose new properties (or classes).
You can do this on Schema.org W3C Community Group’s mailing list, or on Schema.org’s GitHub issue tracker.
See: How can I get involved? How can I propose new schemas or other improvements?
If accepted, it might become part of the core (if it’s something "the most common web applications need"), or it might become an extension.
(deprecated!) Extend existing properties.
Extending existing properties is documented at http://schema.org/docs/old_extension.html, but note that this mechanism is considered outdated.
For specific types (including Product), you can use Schema.org’s additionalProperty property:
A property-value pair representing an additional characteristics of the entitity, e.g. a product feature or another characteristic for which there is no matching property in schema.org.
Related
I'm having a difficulty figuring out where to put the Level attribute. I want the employee to have a variety of skills which have different levels. For that purpose I made a many to many relationship which is implemented as an EmployeeSkill association class.
An example of said class is as follows: An employee named Jack might have a skill of Java which is level beginner, while he could also have a skill of C# which is advanced level. Should the level be saved in the EmployeeSkill association class or in the Skill class? I suspect it should be on the association class.
A property of the association class?
Your narrative with the Employee instance "Jack" being associated with Skill instance "Java" with a level of "beginner" shows that the skill is independent of the level, and the level is related to the combination of a given employee and a given skill.
To model accurately the semantic of this narrative, level should indeed be the property of the association class EmployeeSkill.
Could it be a property of the skills?
It would not be wrong to move level as a property of Skill. But the model would have a different semantic, since every Employee associated with a Skill would share the same level. This means that "Jack" being associated to a skill like "Java" but rather a skill like Elementary Java.
This alternative model makes it also less convenient to desperately search for all employees knowing about Neural network regardless of the level. And it would not be obvious for the system to see that elementary neural network is related to advanced neural network expertise and that Advanced java has little to do with Advanced javascript.
To have the same power of expression, the skills that are related but correspond to a different level would require an explicit association, which would make the model more cumbersome to use and fragile.
Remarks that are unrelated to your question
You seem to repeat the JobCategory's and the Country's attribute within Employee. This is confusing, as the associations already associate the class with another set of each of these attributes. Did you mean the redundant attributes to implement the associations and show the db table layout than the class? If so, you should disambiguate using some custom stereotypes. But I'd rather recommend to remove the redundant items and make a comment at the bottom of the diagram to explain that you implement associations.
I wonder if the multiplicities of the association between Skill and SkillCategory are not inverted (i.e. one category can have several skills and each skill is associated with only one category) ? Or that you meant a many-to-many association if skills can belong to several categories.
In the association class you use the prefix FK to highlight the foreign keys. Use <<FK>> to make it a custom stereotype (see may first remark about using stereotypes).
As qwerty_so pointed out in the comments, you use a nesting connector for the associations with enumerations. This is syntactically acceptable but does not mean what you think. This is meant to deal with namespaces. Just remove that circle-plus symbol to make it a normal association and it will mean what you think.
I'm listing my conference publications on my homepage (German website). I want to annotate those publications with Schema.org. In bibtex those publications are inproceedings (see here).
Schema.org provides CreativeWork and subclasses. But, I can not find any type suitable for a conference publication. I'm not sure if Article is the right class to choose.
Do you have any recommendation to annotate a conference publication?
CreativeWork is definitely the correct parent type, and if there should be no suitable sub-type, you could simply go with CreativeWork.
But I think the sub-type Article is suitable, and in your case probably its sub-type ScholarlyArticle.
Note that there is also the Bibliographic Extension of Schema.org, but as far as scientific publications are concerned, it currently only seems to define a Thesis type, which doesn’t help in your case.
Plan to refactor the data JSON format to JSON-LD, using a dictionary schema.org.
The problem is that we need to pass additional properties that are not in the dictionary schema.org, we cannot abandon these properties because there it is technical metadata that is used in the logic of our AJAX sites.
The question of having the properties are not in the dictionary schema.org, create problems for indexing AJAX our site, or search bot will simply ignore the properties he does not know and it does not affect indexing?
Bots will simply ignore those properties. If you don't map them to URLs (for example by setting them explicitly to null in the context), they are effectively invisible for a JSON-LD processor. See http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#advanced-context-usage for more details
I am trying to add a Tagged Value in Enterprise Architect which allows the selection of one or more values, a multi-select tagged value type in effect.
Is this possible?
Xstian's answer is partially correct if you're working with profiles. However, it only provides you with a select-from-a-list tag type (and you should not import profiles directly into a project, you should create MDG Technologies instead).
EA also allows you to create what are known as structured tagged values. These come in different flavours, and allow you to select a value from an enum list, a file name from a browser dialog, a date from a calendar, and many others -- including classes in the same model.
These tagged value types are configured in Settings - UML Types - Tagged Value Types. The syntax is described in the help file under Extending UML Models - MDG Technology SDK - Tagged Value Types - Predefined Types (but note that you do not need to create an MDG Technology or even a profile for these tag types to work).
You can add to any model element more than one tagged value of the same name - each of them can have different value. Together they logically constitute "set of values" (i.e. multi-valued tag).
Yes it is.
I solved in this way.
You should create a your Stereotype
http://www.sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/10/extending_uml_models/addingelementsandmetaclass.html
(e.g. see image)
You should export this profile in XML and import it into EnterpriseArchitect
http://www.sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/10/extending_uml_models/importingprofiles.html
Add this stereotype to your class,connector, etc
I hope I've given you all the answers about your question
I have some documents and an ontology for some concepts. Are there any frameworks that automatically extracts those concepts from the given documents and creates triples? The ontology must contain special properties?
I found UIMA, but as far as I understood with UIMA I can do only something like this:
create some dictionaries which keep associations with the ontology
use this dictionary with ConceptMapper
write a CAS consumer that creates the triples and persists them -
I don't like this approach because I have to keep in sync the concepts from the ontology and the dictionary.
Can be UIMA used differently, or are there any advanced frameworks that can use directly my ontology with lets say some custom properties as input and based on it annotate the documents?
I want to use ontologies as domain model because I want to create further a knowledge base and ontologies seem more flexible than for example relational model.
Thanks.
After spending more time searching on Google I found GATE and more specifically OntoRoot Gazetter and Large KB Gazetteer.
OntoRoot Gazetteer is a type of a dynamically created gazetteer that is, in combination with few other generic GATE resources, capable of producing ontology-based annotations over the given content with regards to the given ontology. This gazetteer is a part of ‘Gazetteer_Ontology_Based’ plugin that has been developed as a part of the TAO project.
I didn't test them but these ones seem good solution candidates for my problem.