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: jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:23:32 +0100
Message-ID: <CAO+52yXUCH3VhGXWerjs41RZuO3h+ae3vCdMc_3=QUTHaXmQVw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Cc: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, public-vocabs@w3.org
Hello,

1 - Do you think Event could be enriched with an "about" property ?
This would enable to better qualify the Event, as it is done for
CreativeWork
it would also solve the following point :
say "Festival de Cannes 2012" is  about the concept of "Festival de Cannes"
and not a sub event of "Festival de Cannes" concept

2 - We also miss a property enabling to relate an Event to a creativeWork.
It would be useful to be able to describe that the opera representation of
AIDA in NY in April 2011, is related to the creative Work AIDA by Verdi

Cheers
Jean




2012/3/3 Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>

> 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://dannyayers.com
>
> http://webbeep.it  - text to tones and back again
>
>


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+33 6 01 22 48 55, delahousse.jean@gmail.com, skype: jean.delahousse
@jdelahousse, http://jean-delahousse.info
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 09:24:05 GMT

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