W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > June 2014

schema.org markup for a community meeting?

From: Justin Boyan <jaboyan@google.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 12:51:55 +0000
Message-ID: <CABJSzUtQ8ZOJ0bRqb6-1z2ysSgtTtzmNbgU8sutCA-utShiGMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Albert Willis <alwillis@mac.com>, W3C public vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
I think adding a 'host' or 'organizer' property alongside attendee and
performer on schema.org/Event would make sense. I also think adding a new
subtype, say, schema.org/CivicEvent, is a no-brainer. The accessibility and
amenities issues should be considered more broadly - and perhaps they go
with the Place rather than the Event. Finally, IMO, issuesToAddress is
unlikely to be used consistently as a structured field so that data should
probably just be part of the event description.

Justin

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014, 5:31 AM, Albert Willis <alwillis@mac.com> wrote:

> Working on a project and I need to markup meetings of community members of
> a city or neighborhood to address a civic issue and nothing in
> http://schema.org/Event fits.
>
> Ideally, I’d like a version of Event with the following changes:
>
>
>    - instead of a performer, it would be a convener (or host) which would
>    be a Person or Organization
>    - instead of workPerformed, it would be issuesToAddress (something
>    that’s not a CreativeWork)
>    - markup to indicate if an RSVP is required
>    - a contactPoint for the meeting (like we see in
>    http://schema.org/Organization) for RSVPs or additional information
>    - markup for amenities offered (food, child care) to make it more
>    convenient for people to attend
>    - should be able to specify whether the location has affordances for
>    people in wheelchairs, etc.
>    - should be able to indicate if there will be translation available
>    for non-native speakers
>    - should be able to indicate whether sign language for deaf people
>    will be available
>
>
> Most of the meetings I attend are hosted by ad hoc or temporary entities
> (committees, working groups, etc.) that aren’t formal Organizations, so the
> http://schema.org/Organization markup doesn’t work well for that either,
> but that’s another issue.
>
> In the short term, any suggestions for a combination of markup I could use
> to indicate some of these attributes?
>
> Longer term, I’m happy to participate in a process for new schema.org
> vocabulary to address these issues.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>   — Al
>
>
> ---
> Al Willis
> alwillis@mac.com
>
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 12:52:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:42 UTC