W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > March 2012

Re: Last Call for Comments ... Re: proposal for updates to http://schema.org/Event

From: Adrian Giurca <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:26:50 +0100
Message-ID: <4F5478CA.3030603@tu-cottbus.de>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
I would say Schema.org does not define any required property.  By 
consequence interpreting a missing @location in http://schema.org/Event 
as null is a bit forced. One may define an http://schema.org/Event just 
by using one of properties such as:

@startDate - then if nothing else is known, a processor would say this 
is a continuous event after @startDate
@endDate  - if nothing else is known, a processor would say this is a 
continuous event ending at  @endDate (this event may have been started 
already)
@startDate + @duration or @endDate + @duration or @startDate + @endDate 
- will define a specific time-frame event
@duration = "0" would mean an instantaneous event. Various combinations 
with @startDate, @endDate would be possible


As for events periodicity, I stay on  my belief that supporting 
recurring events by making @startDate and @endDate repeated is too 
verbose, but maybe the schema.org initiator know that this is simple for 
the content creators.

The ISO 8601 also use the concept of recurring time intervals by using a 
periodicity solution, see http://dotat.at/tmp/ISO_8601-2004_E.pdf (on 
Page 23)

  -Adrian Giurca



On 3/3/2012 2:14 PM, Danny Ayers wrote:
> Sorry, sloppy - a little clarification - I didn't mean strictly just a
> point in time, rather the whole time aspect as currently defined.
>
> On 3 March 2012 13:38, Hausenblas, Michael<michael.hausenblas@deri.org>  wrote:
>> I think it would be desirable to redefine Event solely as something
>> that happens at a particular point in time, allowing the term to be
>> reused much more widely. I don't believe this would break any current
>> uses. YMMV as far as logical interpretation of schema.org terms is
>> concerned, but in one universe at least, decorating a time-only Event
>> with a Place seems a lot more sensible than assigning a time+place
>> Event a null place.
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Cheers,
>>               Michael
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On 3 Mar 2012, at 12:16, "Danny Ayers"<danny.ayers@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>> (Afraid I haven't time at the moment to go through the history
>> properly, so if this point has already been discussed, please ignore)
>>
>> I looked at the Event construct with a view to potentially reusing it
>> in the context of projects. But there's a slight problem: Event is
>> associated with a time and a *place*. While in practice it may still
>> be possible to use the term without assigning a place, it seems a
>> little untidy.
>>
>> There is already a bit of messiness as it stands: an Event could be a
>> meeting, right? In what Place does a teleconference or Hangout happen?
>>
>> I think it would be desirable to redefine Event solely as something
>> that happens at a particular point in time, allowing the term to be
>> reused much more widely. I don't believe this would break any current
>> uses. YMMV as far as logical interpretation of schema.org terms is
>> concerned, but in one universe at least, decorating a time-only Event
>> with a Place seems a lot more sensible than assigning a time+place
>> Event a null place.
>>
>> €0.02
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Danny.
>>
>> --
>> http://dannyayers.com
>>
>> http://webbeep.it  - text to tones and back again
>>
>
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 08:27:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:49:00 GMT