Monday, August 5, 2013

Vocabulary for describing Civic Services

When people are in need of government services, they often turn to search engines, but the top result may not be for the service of interest. A new vocabulary, similar to the European Commission ISA Core Public Service vocabulary, has been proposed to improve search engines’ understanding of these services. It is intended to provide enough information to determine the service, the area covered by the service, and relevant information for using the service. The Civic Services proposal is available from W3C's Wiki; any future updates and status reports will be made available in the same way.

We are always open to ideas for expanding schema.org's descriptive vocabulary. Day-to-day public discussion of such extensions happens in the W3C WebSchemas group, using a combination of e-mail and Wiki pages to explore new schema ideas. However we are aware that not everyone will follow those detailed discussions, and it is often important to get wider review of proposed schemas. The full Civic Services proposal (see full PDF) gives details of scope and markup examples - currently the focus is on describing the availability of services, and on various kinds of permit. The vocabulary is designed to integrate with other aspects of schema.org, e.g. our medical/health and Audience vocabularies, as well as the mechanisms for describing opening hours and locations shared by various kinds of local business and government office. An example HTML snippet describing a hotline, including the languages offered and provider is available in the WebSchemas Wiki at W3C.

Schema.org would like to encourage review and commentary around this new proposed vocabulary; in particular we would like to hear from potential publishers of such data from around the world. Comments are welcomed here, in the W3C Wiki, by public email to public-vocabs@w3.org (preferred) or to schema-org-contact@googlegroups.com. 

5 comments:

  1. Thanks for the opportunity to provide feedback.

    Could there be an easier way to post comments related to specific sections of the proposal?

    Regarding:
    Schema > thing > intangible > service
    ADD
    funder Thing > Organization The organization or agency that is funding the service. repeated
    Rationale: To help people find programs they are eligible by funder. To help organizations find sources of funding. To help funders track impact.

    Regarding:
    schema> Thing > intangible > Permit
    ADD
    validFrom Date The date when the permit was issued.
    Rationale: drug approvals, and patent issued/filed provide helpful information for the market

    regarding:
    schema > Thing > intangible > servicechannel
    ADD
    applicationURL
    Rationale: it is so hard to find the application form, in whatever format it is in.

    regarding:
    schema > thing > intangible > permit
    ADD
    "legalAuthority" text the legal authority of the issuedBy to issue name.
    Rationale: it conveys rights of the individual/corporation and governing authority. In particular for government services/activity, civil servants and lawyers are diligent about operating under proper legal authority.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is a great start and really the only way we're going to evolve the gov't open data movement in the direction of open services. processingTime alone could engender constituent trust more quickly than most open data that's being published. Let us know how we can help move this spec along.

    ReplyDelete
  3. i have a problem with recipe picture , it was dispalying perfect , then sadenly is not anymore but it still showing in the test tool but not in search result , can someone plz help me ?

    http://www.lacksokning.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This isn't a product support forum;try http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!categories/webmasters/structured-data

      Delete
  4. Note: let's use http://openeligibility.org to describe Audience.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.