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

Re: Schema.org proposal: New Actions and Actions contigent on an Offer

From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 22:43:32 +0200
Message-ID: <541B43F4.60804@wwelves.org>
To: Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>
CC: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 09/17/2014 11:21 PM, Vicki Tardif Holland wrote:
> In order to model the operation of devices and applications, we propose
> adding the following new Actions:
> 
> http://schema.org/OperateAction
> http://schema.org/ActivateAction
> http://schema.org/DectivateAction
> http://schema.org/ResumeAction
> http://schema.org/SuspendAction
Sounds exciting! I keep hearing IoT all over :)

Do you already have some examples? Maybe you could open PR on github and
everyone could help polish it there, also this way easier in a future to
find origins of given feature.

> 
> Actions around media consumption often require buying or leasing media.
> To that end, we propose adding to ConsumeAction
> 
> http://schema.org/contingentOnOffer
Very interesting! What do you think about keeping it more generic, just:
*contingentOn* We could start with rangeIncludes offer but maybe later
extend it to also inclue Action.
I remember meeting in Graz a year ago Markus Lanthaler, who leads work
on http://www.hydra-cg.com/ We discussed one of my use cases when I need
to define that JoinAction for an Event *depends on* performing
LeaveAction first for another Event happening at the same time in far
location (eg. different city). contingentOn sounds like an opportunity
to address it :)

> 
> And adding to Offer
> http://schema.org/notAvailableAtOrFrom
Whenever we change Offer I think we should check if it also makes sense
for Demand. Also looking at name of this property @|@ I would propose
considering some alternative solutions before committing to this one. I
have some suggestions but would prefer to share them in github PR (or Issue)

> 
> See the attached PDF for details.
GitHub Flavored Markdown supports all the formating you use in your PDF!
I just went ahead and converted this PDF to nice issue:
https://github.com/rvguha/schemaorg/issues/125

Yesterday folks at #indiewebcamp gave me hard time once I pointed them
to one of proposals in PDF :'(
https://twitter.com/elfpavlik/status/512354221291614208


> 
> As always, comments are welcome,
> Vicki

:)
Received on Thursday, 18 September 2014 20:45:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:44 UTC