Topic on Extension talk:WikibaseMediaInfo/RDF mapping

our use of schema:caption is slightly more general than the one of schema.org, but this seems acceptable; improvement suggested on GitHub

While I agree that schema:caption seems like a good predicate to use, the schema.org folks seem to have defined it a bit oddly: it’s not used on the general MediaObject class, but only on the AudioObject, ImageObject and VideoObject classes. A MusicVideoObject or a DataDownload, for example, apparently shouldn’t have a caption.

With the extended representation, I guess that should be fine, because each MediaInfo would be an instance of AudioObject, ImageObject or VideoObject. (Well… what happens for other media types?) But in the basic representation, it’s only an instance of MediaObject… is that an issue?

Before this ticket schema:caption was only for schema:VideoObject apparently. Maybe it could be expanded further?

Hey @Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE):. Sorry for the late answer. Thank you very much for raising this point. I believe that schema.org allows to extend the scope of properties. I also proposed to use on multi-pages files schema:numberOfPages that is supposed to be used on Books.

There are some media types where there seems to be no good MediaObject sub classes, for examples PDFs or DjVus. I believe that in this case the easiest thing to do, at least for now, is using only the MediaInfo class. What do you think about it?

I have opened a ticket on schema.org GitHub about expending schema:caption scope.

That makes sense to me, thanks for your answer :)