DBpedia.org Ontology versus Schema.org Ontology

Question

First off, I'm trying to define database tables with attributes from Schema.org, eg., for example I have a table named "JobPosting" that more or less has the same attributes as those defined in http://schema.org/JobPosting (baseSalary, etc.,), same goes for another table named "Organisation"

I have recently come across dbpedia.org (http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Organisation), the schema details seem to be much more richer, but I'm am confused as to:

1. Is dbpedia.org ontology an extension of those listed in schema.org?
2. Are dbpedia.org schemas recognized by major search engines (as those from schema.org)
3. What's the difference between Microdata and RFDs?

I'm going a little stir crazy trying to find the details...I couldn't find any comparisons vis-a-vis dbpedia.og vs schema.org.

Answer 1

Schema.org is one of countless vocabularies (resp. ontologies). The DBpedia Ontology is another one. Both vocabularies are independent of each other. Another vocabulary, related to your example, would be The Organization Ontology.

Which search engines recognize which vocabularies is a question without a definite answer. Search engines might recognize vocabularies without documenting it, or they might not recognize some (parts of) vocabularies although their documentation says otherwise. On top of that, all this might change daily.

You asked for the difference between Microdata and RFDs RDFs, but it’s likely that you mean RDFa in this context. Both are syntaxes which can be used to annotate content with the help of vocabularies. See my answer about differences between Microdata and RDFa.

(RDFS is "just" another vocabulary which can be used to describe vocabularies.)

Answer 2

I will try to answer all your questions, with understandable explanations.

1. Is dbpedia.org ontology an extension of those listed in schema.org?

No, it's not. There are countless ontologies available online, and any of them can be used combined, or alone, as long as their namespace (i.e. https://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/ for SKOS or http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/ for SIOC) is a valid URI.

2. Are dbpedia.org schemas recognized by major search engines (as those from schema.org)?

dbpedia schemas are as good as any other, and, as stated in the answer for the first question, it really doesn't matter which ontology you decide to use, as long as it best fits your content. You can even create your own ontology in OWL-RDF.

3. What's the difference between Microdata and RFDa (not RDFs)?

The only difference between these 2 attribute sets is the way they're written, while they both do the same thing.

Other information:

• RDFs stands for Resource Description Format Schema, and it's a format used to write the ontologies, together with OWL

• OWL stands for Web Ontology Language, and it was created especially for writing ontologies

• RDFa stands for Resource Description Format in Attributes, and it's an attribute set used to create structured data mapped on the existent HTML code

• Microdata is an attribute set used to create structured data mapped on the existent HTML code