This came up via the Trust Project contributions (c.f. #1950) to Schema.org a few years back, and is touched on in the blog post from Andy Dudfield and Leigh Dodds.

From that blog post:

Corrections and actions. The second wave of fact checking is about more than just writing fact checks, it involves taking action to tackle disinformation. How might we surface data about requests for corrections to published content, and record when those corrections have been made? Schema.org currently includes some vocabulary to help describe corrections and comments which we've explored. But further work is needed to define a useful way of recording and sharing the other activities undertaken by fact checkers.

Currently we have:

• https://schema.org/correction
  • "Indicates a correction to a CreativeWork, either via a CorrectionComment, textually or in another document."
• https://schema.org/correctionsPolicy
  • "For an Organization (e.g. NewsMediaOrganization), a statement describing (in news media, the newsroom’s) disclosure and correction policy for errors."
• The https://schema.org/version is also relevant.

These are a good foundation, but seem to have been under-utilized so far.

In the context of a ClaimReview, it would be good to know - in the case of problematic claims - if the claimant has made a correction somewhere. This could be written/spoken, informal or formal, or perhaps also journalistic coverage of those. This case I suspect is likely to be largely political factchecking, but there are also other high profile public figures who sometimes retract or correct their claims.

However, we should also cover cases beyond fact checking - books, articles (scholarly or otherwise), media content - these are all areas where mistakes are made and corrected.

I am opening this issue to encourage evaluation of the existing correction vocabulary, especially in the context of factchecking and ClaimReview. Are there important usecases we don't cover, or examples we should add to the site?