Re: Schema.org RentalCarReservation extra/missing field

Thanks for the update.
On a another issue, adding "licensePlate" to get "RentalCarReservation.reservationFor.licensePlate" may be useful since there exists rental emails with license plate information.
Let me know if this is acceptable or if it will have too much private information.
-Jimmy

      From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@unibw.de>
 To: Jimmy Phan <jimmylongphan@yahoo.com> 
Cc: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org> 
 Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2015 2:27 AM
 Subject: Re: Schema.org RentalCarReservation extra/missing field
   
reservationFor is a property of https://schema.org/Reservation, which is a supertype of https://schema.org/RentalCarReservation. It is used to link the reservation to the object being reserved. 

So reservationFor is used correctly as far as I can see.

As for operatingCompany, this property is missing in schema.org, as you spotted.

RSTT also complains about that when validating the JSON-LD example.

I support your proposal to simply use provider, attached to the RentalCarReservation instead of a new operatingCompany property.


Martin

--------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  martin.hepp@unibw.de
phone:  +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:    +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:    http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
        http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:  mfhepp 
twitter: mfhepp







> On 03 Nov 2015, at 01:22, Jimmy Phan <jimmylongphan@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Schema.org,
> 
> In RentalCarReservation - schema.org , the JSON example contains "reservationFor.operatingCompany".  However, this field is not under https://schema.org/Car.
> 
> Let's not use this field because "RentalCarReservation.provider" may already provide all the organization details of the rental company. 
> 
> Any thoughts on the "operatingCompany" field?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> -Jimmy