W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > March 2013

Re: LocalBusinessDepartment proposal for schema.org.

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:15:34 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFrF4t9yo+keaC+4+rHGCaRhOPbae1M7gQ5jbroE3DTqrw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Cc: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, jaboyan@google.com, Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com>
On 5 March 2013 17:23, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
> Here's a draft of a proposal for a LocalBusinessDepartment addition to
> schema.org. It is pretty small. Basic idea is that some larger 'local
> businesses' have a variety of named departments, which are worth
> describing as independent entities (e.g. opening hours etc.).
>
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/LocalBusinessDepartment
>
> The suggestion is for one new type, LocalBusinessDepartment, alongside
> a pair of properties (department / departmentOf) that associate a
> LocalBusinessDepartment with a LocalBusiness. For simplicity a
> LocalBusinessDepartment is also considered a LocalBusiness (thus
> inheriting all applicable properties, our primary goal).
>
> I'll try to flesh out with some full markup examples, but I hope this
> sketch is enough to get some discussion moving.

In light of subsequent discussion, I've updated the wiki page at
http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/LocalBusinessDepartment

The proposal is simpler now. We augment "Organization" with the
ability to point to a department, which is just another Organization
(or, implicitly, one of its more specific subtypes). We have
departmentOf as an inverse pointer.

Also we would generalise the 'openingHoursSpecification' property
(which takes the similarly named OpeningHoursSpecification type as a
value); instead of only applying to a LocalBusiness, we allow it to
apply potentially to any Organization.

See http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/LocalBusinessDepartment#Overview

This seems a pretty tiny change that brings a lot of useful
functionality. Any objections or shall we move ahead with it?

Dan
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2013 12:16:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 14 March 2013 12:16:09 GMT