Re: VideoGame proposal

I don't want to derail the VideoGames work. We could create a
VideoGameSeries for now. Then re-engineer Series to encompass TV, Radio,
VideoGames, and all of the other media types that don't have Series types.

- Vicki

Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vtardif@google.com


On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 to Thad and Vicki's observations on a general series - notwithstanding
> the fact that in retrospect schema.org/Series was too specifically
> conceived of as pertaining to a TV or radio series, and leaving us with the
> legacy issues inherent in same.
>
> So having said that, as much as it may not be desirable to create a type
> for each new domain, IMO one can't adequately describe a contemporary video
> game without referencing to the series to which it belongs (when, of
> course, it is part of a series).  That is, the solution to the conundrum
> may be a domain-specific type even if it's sub-optimal, or it may be a
> rejigging of schema.org/Series even it that's onerous - but it shouldn't
> be punting on having a mechanism to straightforwardly declare a video game
> series because it's inconvenient.  As much as TVSeries and RadioSeries may
> have found a better home under a more generic Series type there's a reason
> why TVSeries and RadioSeries are there:  you need them to talk about TV
> shows and radio shows.
>
> I don't think ItemList is appropriate for a number of reasons, first among
> them being that a list implies requires multiple items in the series to be
> a series, whereas a TV series or radio series or video game series may be a
> standalone entity.
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@unibw.de> wrote:
>
>> What about simply using ItemList for a series of entities?
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> On 16 Oct 2014, at 00:09, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Yes Vicki
>> >
>> > (only if you make it generic enough),
>> >
>> > The common Entertainment domains, like those you listed, probably
>> > could all re-use a generic Series type.
>> >
>> > After Entertainment, the other kinds of Series, that I can think of,
>> > happen in the Scientific, Manufacturing, and Architectural domains
>> > primarily and may not be of a category against something that is
>> > Creative (that usually has a Creator attached), but more dry like a
>> > SeriesClass or SeriesGroup or ProductLine/Series (where there is
>> > usually NOT a Creator as a person, but still might have a Creator that
>> > is an organization, a Creator none-the-less).
>> >
>> > Make it generic enough and it should be able to deal with:
>> >
>> > A Book Series,
>> > A Video Game Series,
>> > A TV Series,
>> > A Radio Series,
>> > A Manufacturing Product Line (Also known as a Manufacturing Series):
>> > http://www.colt.com/Catalog/Rifles/LE6920Series.aspx
>> > etc.
>> >
>> > Agreed.
>> >
>> > --
>> > -Thad
>> > +ThadGuidry
>> > Thad on LinkedIn
>> >
>>
>>
>