I am starting to learn schema.org schema. I come from the RDF/OWL community.
To my surprise I could not indeed find an RDFS or OWL vocabulary representation of schema.org. More specifically, I realised that it was just a HTML page describing the schema. I also found an RDFa representation of the schema. Not sure that it can be a legal RDFS representation by the way. All of this got me a bit confused.
In the meantime I found the following works: http://topbraid.org/schema/ and http://schema.rdfs.org/.
Hence I have the following few questions:
1- Are both work achieving the same thing? if not what is the difference between the two?
1.2- What is their respective goal, and use case?
3- The URIs do not correspond to the URI of the ontology, isn’t it odd? How does that align itself with Linked Data principles?
4- Is schema.org fully aligned with Linked Data principle?
5- I find it odd to reference a schema that has no RDFs representation? How one can one use it in tools like Protégé for instance?
I would really appreciate to have some clarification over this.
From http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html:
The canonical machine representation of schema.org is in RDFa:
schema_org_rdfa.html
(See my answer on Webmasters SE for other representation.)
This HTML+RDFa version uses the RDFS vocabulary. It’s as good as any other RDF serialization. If you don’t like RDFa, you could of course use your favorite converter to get Turtle, RDF/XML, or whatever you prefer.