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

• From: <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
• Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 10:20:04 +0200
• To: Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com>, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>
• Cc: ? elf Pavlik ? <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
• Message-Id: <F9F1EB37-F998-4E82-B4F0-AEFCDBE92C0E@ebusiness-unibw.org>

On 19 Sep 2014, at 00:10, Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com> wrote:

> is 'notAvailableAtOrFrom' really needed, wouldn't the following work as well?

I think it is needed. But I noticed that there is a big mistake: The proper property is 

    http://schema.org/eligibleRegion

not

   http://schema.org/availableAtOrFrom


eligibleRegion defines the region(s) for which the offer is valid.

availableAtOrFrom defines the place from which you can get the (typically physical) product or service. It is meant to link from an offer to the points of sale, e.g. rental stations or other local businesses.

When in doubt, it makes sense to look up the more comprehensive textual definitions on the GoodRelations site. I will link them better to the schema.org elements in the future.

http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#eligibleRegions

http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1.html#availableAtOrFrom

So the new property must be

schema:ineligibleRegion

This is important.

> 
> Not Available in China
> 
> {
> "@context": "http://schema.org",
> "@type": "WatchAction",
> "target": "http://www.hulu.com/the­daily­show­with­jon­stewart",
> "contingentOnOffer": {
> 	"@type": "Offer",
> 	"availability": "http://schema.org/False",
> 	"availableAtOrFrom": {
> 		"@type": "Country",
> 		"name": "CHN"
> 	}
> }


This will IMO not work without invalidating the existing definition of schema:availability. An old client will infer from this tthat the object is not available.


Martin

Received on Friday, 19 September 2014 08:20:31 UTC