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

Re: September Update on Sports

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 08:10:37 -0700
Message-ID: <5424306D.5000009@gmail.com>
To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
CC: trond.huso@ntb.no, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
I just asked a domain expert, and his unequivocal answer is that rugby union 
is a sport, as are both rugby league and rugby itself.

How would your proposal to use some external mechanisms to handle this kind of 
relationship work?

peter


On 09/25/2014 07:42 AM, Thad Guidry wrote:
> Peter,
>
> I agree with Martin, that we want the simple cases within Schema.org and leave
> other KOS / Vocabularies to pick up the long-tail of sub categorization and
> sub-Typing for certain domains.
>
> I think just using a SKOS, or some other KOS, to do the actual sub-Typing in
> Schema.org through the use of http://schema.org/additionalType should handle
> saying that "doubles badminton" is a sub-Type of "badminton", etc.
>
> (rugby and rugby union would probably not have an additionalType
> relationship...they are 2 different Things, one is a Sport, the other a type
> of Organization)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Without sub-sports, you have to determine at what level you are going to
>     have sports.  For example, is badminton a sport, or is it racquet sport,
>     or doubles badminton?  Is it ski racing, or alpine ski racing, or slalom,
>     or men's slalom, or Olympic men's slalom?  Is it rugby, or rugby union and
>     rugby league?
>
>     If you can have sub-sports, then you don't need to make all these
>     decisions. If you are a rugby union player then you are a rugby player,
>     etc., etc.
>
>     This is the approach taken by Cyc, which does a good job of it.  DBpedia
>     has some aspects of this approach, but doesn't carry it through.  Freebase
>     uses similar approaches in some places, like professions, but doesn't have
>     the representational power to fully support this representational meme.
>
>     peter
>
>
>
>     On 09/25/2014 06:01 AM, trond.huso@ntb.no <mailto:trond.huso@ntb.no> wrote:
>
>         What is a sub-sport?
>
>         -----Original Message-----
>         From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider [mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com
>         <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>__]
>         Sent: 24. september 2014 21:00
>         To: Dan Brickley; Vicki Tardif Holland
>         Cc: Jason Johnson (BING); W3C Web Schemas Task Force; Gregg Kellogg
>         Subject: Re: September Update on Sports
>
>         Intriguing.
>
>         Is there going to be a non-trivial theory of sports.  For example,
>         will there be sub-sports?
>
>         peter
>
>
>         On 09/24/2014 11:19 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>
>             On 24 Sep 2014 18:48, "Vicki Tardif Holland" <vtardif@google.com
>             <mailto:vtardif@google.com>
>             <mailto:vtardif@google.com <mailto:vtardif@google.com>>> wrote:
>                >
>                >
>                > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Gregg Kellogg
>             <gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>
>             <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>__>>
>             wrote:
>                >>
>                >> A "namedPosition" property would be fine, as long as the
>             range is
>             not schema:Text. IMO, something like this should use URIs for such
>             enumerated values. Schema.org always allows falling back to text.
>                >
>                >
>                > I am looking at
>             http://sdo-sports.appspot.com/__OrganizationRole
>             <http://sdo-sports.appspot.com/OrganizationRole>. The
>             range is URL or text. I agree that URIs should be used to have any
>             hope of understanding what the value means.
>
>             Yes, I'm also updating 'sport' property similarly.
>
>             Dan
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> -Thad
> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
> Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>
Received on Thursday, 25 September 2014 15:11:10 UTC

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