Warning: This tool or project is no longer maintained and kept available only for archival purposes. Since GoodRelations and schema.org have evolved significantly in the past years, the current status available on this page is unlikely to function as expected. We take no responsibility for any damage caused by the use of this outdated work, to the extent legally possible.

Due to a lack of resources, we are unable to provide support for this project outside of consulting projects or sponsored research. Please contact us if you can contribute resources to update and enhance these resources.

GoodRelations - The Web Vocabulary for E-Commerce

This is the archive of the goodrelations dicussion list

GoodRelations is a standardized vocabulary for product, price, and company data that can (1) be embedded into existing static and dynamic Web pages and that (2) can be processed by other computers. This increases the visibility of your products and services in the latest generation of search engines, recommender systems, and other novel applications.

[goodrelations] GoodRelations + RDFa have huge impact on Google Rank and CTR

Giovanni Tummarello giovanni.tummarello at deri.org
Fri Dec 11 02:31:18 CET 2009

> They will keep on producing both, but following our recommendation, the
> RDF/XML will be a dump meant for crawlers only and collating the rich
> meta-data from all RDFa mark-up.

Great so we can index it ina single shot and evenctually every day

> So the authoritative URIs will be those from the RDFa and if you dereference
> an entity URI, you will go to the XHTML+RDFa resource.


> hurry for that.. and they work right away in the inspector
> http://sindice.com/developers/inspector/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fproducts.semweb.bestbuy.com%2Fy%2Fproducts%2F7590289%2F#sigma
> Yes, but please also show key values like price, payment, and delivery
> options, even if those require parsing a single intermediate node.

Martin can typeand quantity and unitprice and offering node exist on
their own really ?

 I can and will do something speacial for goodrelations for sigma but
i cannot but wonder if the model needs those pieces, Sigma also
commits to provide a simplified RDF to people who want it.

 I could understand providing not just a key value pair description
but an extra noda saying for example "iphone" (node1)   ---> "find it
on sale at bestbuy for $199" (node2, a node with all those other
properties attached) but yet more and more nodes (e.g. 2-3 like here)
seems too much.  Could i come up with a simplified node that is the
offerincludingunitpricetypeandquantity node?  to give to my sigma
users? :-) how about adding that to goodrelations?

wrt inspector and visualization please note that a complete "human
readably" rdf representation is also available e.g. here


which is complete, albeit less intuitive than the sig.ma representation.

should we put this one first instead of sig.ma? should we allow the
user to pick which node sigma looks at (sig.ma is entity based, needs
to pick 1 node).

notice that soon we will be announcing the inspector as a
omnicomprehensive tool for validating web data, syntactically
(including the w3c validation), semantically, and more (best practice
validator including the "pedantic" web validation, linked ontology
check (already in place), so we want this to be as good as developer
friendly/useful as possible.

So suggestions are very welcome!!

> Also, you should use the ean ucc 13 property to suggest related entities,
> even if this is a literal value instead of a URI.

how to use it for suggestions?


More information about the goodrelations mailing list