- From: Nick Evans <Nick.Evans@sportengland.org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:51:48 +0000
- To: "'public-openactive@w3.org'" <public-openactive@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <EFCAB6EDA7B33D408E00A252A8ABEE28D09EEB63@SE-SC-VM-EX-01>
Hi Leigh Following on from the last session and your e-mail, please find attached Allison and my comments: which descriptive properties are most relevant for people searching for events? We know from the Digital Radish research done for spogo that it the activity and location which are important. What we don't know is what do they look for next when they click through. Not sure how you could pick this up without some further research. A quick way to get an opinion on this would be to ask an operators what are the common questions they get through via email or on the phone about a session. what are the additional properties of events we need to describe? what controlled vocabularies, e.g. age ranges, fitness levels, etc are already in use? Potential Areas * Age Many sports have different age ranges, therefore we would not recommend trying to group these. NGBs often change groupings over time particular around children and young people. This should be really be a simple Start age and an End Age, perhaps with an additional category of not applicable * Sex - Are the sessions mixed, single sex etc. * Height & Weight - Some activities may have restrictions on weight and Height. An example of this is Go Ape - https://goape.co.uk/faqs. So there may be a need to add a minimum height and maximum weight. This is evidently only going to apply to some activities * Price - cost of session, court hire by hour etc. * Equipment - what is required, can it be hired on site * Entry Level - Something about whether the event is open to Beginners. It may be harder to define areas around Intermediate and Advanced as these could be very subjective and vary considerably between activity. * Intensity Level - It may be possible to describe whether the activity would be moderate or vigorous in terms of the CMO guidelines, so the user would know how it is contributing to their daily or weekly targets. Evidently these targets vary between age ranges. * Free Text - Most providers will have some form of free text field which will describe what they put in. Is it worth providing some advice on what other information could be relevant to put in this which would be picked up by web crawlers, which could be relevant but not easily definable Evidently there may be further information that would be useful such as the session being Coached and then the info about the coach. This is evidently not an area that we have looked at yet. do we need to define some standard values for these properties, or just allow people to publish what they currently capture? I think where possible we should provide some standard values and start to define these where they are obvious (see above) so that people who are developing systems do not have to reinvent the wheel. In saying this we need to be mindful on the time that we could spend on this. As a starting point you could get members to provide lists of what they have done already as a reference point. Other Comments on Modelling Opportunity Data: * Section 3.1 - Is it worth adding a note here that Coaches and Volunteers are not added at this time? * Section 3.2 - We thought that there was common consensus at the last meeting that people wanted a standard activity list but with acceptance that it was something that people would work towards? * Section 3.3. - why is schedule defined - bolded twice here? And it states we aren't defining session, but then we do essentially define it in the sentence after the note and reference it a number of times. As reworded this section is now quite confusing. The example of the gym class also doesn't help, as most consumers would likely just refer to it as a class, rather than a session? Starts to draw out the difference between what a consumer would refer to an event as, and what the sector would refer to it as - a session and we should seek to overcome this through some separate consumer research. Should we clarify whether we are seeking to develop a standard for the sector, or for the consumer? * 3.3. - Is schedule not just the date/time recurrence?? Are we overcomplicating by defining schedule separately? * 3.4. - there is a need to differentiate between different types of Organisers - or do we mean Organisations here? The schema diagram references organisations not Organisers. Need to ensure consistent use of language. It's also important to cater for the fact that the host of an event can be different from the arranger, who can be different from the funder (I am less clear why funder is important here?) And do we need to define to such detailed levels right now? * 3.5 - the definitions of place/location/venue feel they would benefit from greater definition here - particularly having discussed that after activity, place is the thing that people may wish to search/understand next. As a minimum, we should state that all Locations should have a geospatial reference point - post code, lat/long or grid reference - a simple address description is not good enough. In looking at this in more detail we should go back and look at the Active Places data model around this, particularly in relation to facilities * Also need to clearly differentiate between built facilities and natural environment facilities. The latter will require further input from other organisations such as Environment Agency, Forestry Commission, NGB natural resource sports etc. * 3.7 - this adds a layer of confusion - are we not just referring to the combination of two key concepts here - Activities and Events? Rather than creating a new concept we should consider whether Events should be renamed Opportunities. I thought this was the suggestion from one of the W3C members anyway? Some of this should be picked up under the facilities section when looking at actual man made cycling tracks. This may benefit from a discussion with someone like Ordnance Survey or Sustrans around route information but this is a complicated area and would question whether this is a priority for the moment. * Agreed that Controlled Vocabularies would be useful, but we should discuss how essential this is to spend time on right now , except for the creation of an activity list. Maybe this is a later phase, but as a starting point should people be sharing their own controlled vocabularies? * Section 4 refers to People - are we concerned with this yet - e.g. Coaches? If so, we should define People in the Key concepts section? We conversely refer to People as Person in Section 4? * 4.2. - as referenced above, I don't think we need to create Activity Opportunity * 4.3.2. - We are not sure what we mean by describing participation requirements? We shouldn't keep introducing new terms or reverting to old terms if we have defined new key concepts? * 4.7. - Describing Formats feels like it is an extension of 4.3. - would a format or programme not just be an attribute/properties/additional information of an Event/Opportunity? * 4.8 - as above, is this over complicating what is already trying to be unpicked within Activities and Events ? Nick Evans Head of Planning T: 020 7273 1578 M: 07775 558134 F: 020 7273 1513 E: Nick.Evans@sportengland.org [Sport England]<http://www.sportengland.org/> [This girl can]<http://www.thisgirlcan.co.uk/> 1st Floor, 21 Bloomsbury Street, London, WC1B 3HF [Sport England Linked In]<https://linkedin.com/company/sport-england> [Sport England Twitter]<https://twitter.com/sport_england> [Sport England Facebook]<https://facebook.com/sportengland> [Sport England Instagram]<https://instagram.com/officialsportengland/> [Sport England Youtube Channel]<https://youtube.com/user/sportenglandfilm> The information contained in this e-mail may be subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Additionally, this email and any attachment are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email and any attachment in error, and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying, is strictly prohibited. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 8 March 2017 08:52:22 UTC