>> >> but then allocates a number of itemprops that I cannot see as being >> valid >> >> itemprop="collection" >> itemprop="materials" >> itemprop="dimensions" >> itemprop="creditLine" >> itemprop="accessionNumber" >> >> We are now more than a month into the schema.org initiative and it >> would appear that there is still considerable confusion as to how to >> implement the necessary code with any success. >> >> I'm still at a loss as to how to implement schema tagging effectively >> for real estate listings and do not wish to have to recode customer >> websites multiple times to get it right. To get all the information >> listed, I need to use Product, Place, LocalBusiness and Offer however >> these types would only appear to be available using CreativeWork and >> defining a house as CreativeWork just doesn't seem right. >> >> >> >> On Jul 10, 9:35 am, Shawn Simister wrote: >> > You can see some good usage of schema.org microdata here: >> > >> > http://www.imamuseum.org/art/collections >> > > > > -- > Shawn Simister > > Developer Programs Engineer > Google, San Francisco > http://freebase.com > > ------=_Part_977_27288717.1310370244453 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It's OK, Shawn. The extension mechanism of schema.org indicates

that by= following naming convention you can define microdata feasible.

A= nd a missing part is how extractors fetch those things exceeding

= the domain of schema.org properties and types. For an item, if its

extending properties can be fetched correctly as well as its canonical

properties, it does not matter that what properties should be liste= d as

canonical. However if all things and properties are arbitrar= y, it's not

easy to catch meanings of those things for higher-lev= el systems.

Thus, it's a reason I understand that every item of e= very type allows

custom properties while it expects some can= onical properties.

On extended properties, how is = it explained by higher systems?

It's my question.

<= /div>

/yhh

On Monday, July 11, 2011 10:58:= 51 AM UTC+8, Shawn Simister wrote:

Sorry for any confusion. I see what you mean about those custom prope= rties not being part of the schema.org vocabulary. All I meant was to show examples of schema.org microdata being used on= real live websites.

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 6:59 PM, skygod <skygo...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
I've been following the daily disgests and admit that I do not
understand why Shawn cites http://www.imamuseum.org/art/collections as=
'good' usage.

It starts by using
<div class=3D"content" itemscope itemtype=3D"http://schema.org/
CreativeWork">

but then allocates a number of itemprops that I cannot see as being
valid

itemprop=3D"collection"
itemprop=3D"materials"
itemprop=3D"dimensions"
itemprop=3D"creditLine"
itemprop=3D"accessionNumber"

We are now more than a month into the schema.org initiative and it
would appear that there is still considerable confusion as to how to
implement the necessary code with any success.

I'm still at a loss as to how to implement schema tagging effectively
for real estate listings and do not wish to have to recode customer
websites multiple times to get it right. To get all the information
listed, I need to use Product, Place, LocalBusiness and Offer however
these types would only appear to be available using CreativeWork and
defining a house as CreativeWork just doesn't seem right.

On Jul 10, 9:35 am, Shawn Simister <simi...@google.com> w= rote:
> You can see some good usage of schema.org microdata here:
>
> http://www.imamuseum.org/art/collections

--
Shawn Simis= ter

Developer Programs Engineer

Google, San Fr= ancisco

http://freebas= e.com

------=_Part_977_27288717.1310370244453-- ------=_Part_976_6050884.1310370244452--