Re: schema:offers domain and range inverted?

Hi Martin,

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com> wrote:

> schema:offers has been in schema.org, afaik, since the very first
> release, and other than in GoodRelations, it was used to link from a
> product to its offer or offers. In GoodRelations, gr:offers had a different
> meaning and linked from an agent to an offer.
>

Yes, gr:BusinessEntity=>gr:offers=>gr:Offering as defined in GoodRelations
seems the most natural.

If you want to link from the offer to the items included in the offer,
> there is schema:itemOffered for a single product (same as gr:includes) and
> schema:includesObject for a bundle. CreativeWork
> <http://schema.org/CreativeWork> and Event <http://schema.org/Event> are
> just two types that are actually specializations of schema:Product, but
> since we do not want to put every type that could also be used in offers
> below schema:Product, they are listed explicitly in the range/domain.
>

I know. My question was only about the confusing local name of the
schema:offers property. In particular, it is confusing for people like me
who got used to gr:offers before there was Schema.org. In fact, I might
have used schema:offers as schema:Organization=>schema:offers=>schema:Offer
in several cases, blindly relying on the GoodRelations to Schema.org
mapping.

- Jindřich

-- 
Jindřich Mynarz
http://mynarz.net/#jindrich

>