Re: Proposal: PlaceOfWorship additional sub type Shinto Shrine

On 20 August 2013 19:50, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>wrote:

> Excerpts from Martin Hepp's message of 2013-08-20 09:56:49 +0000:
> > Please, please please let us not put specific types into the main
> schema.org model but instead use an extension mechanism similar to
> http://www.productontology.org.
> >
> > I do not want to offend anybody, but I really think that only
> PlaceOfWorship should be in the schema.org type hierachy.
> +1
>
> otherwise we may end up with ElvisPresleyTemple, MichaelJacksonShrine etc.
> in schema.org ;)
> does any procedure exist here to deprecate all already included special
> cases?
>

I don't see a lot of value in actively deprecating them, if their intent is
clear; they mean what they mean, and have been adopted in good faith by
publishers. Deprecation is a stronger notion than what we need here. In
other groups I've used the word "archaic" for this, to say "ok, this is an
old-style piece of vocabulary". Deprecation suggests that publishers should
remove or update the markup, which seems a little unfair as they've only
recently added it.

What I would suggest is that there may be value in balancing out a few
types that already have some (perhaps excessive) level of subtype detail.
It is an endless task to catalogue the world's religions (hence
Wikipedia/Wikidata). But nevertheless it might (might! I don't know here)
be possible to identify another handful of subtypes that would give
http://schema.org/PlaceOfWorship a more comprehensive grasp of places of
worship that are described in the Web. In general though I do think we look
to Wikidata-like efforts here as the most natural way of addressing the
long tail...

Dan