Re: Cost

On 24 February 2016 at 11:05, Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk> wrote:

>
>
> Yes +1 to the use of the price & priceSpecification properties from Offer
> to specify the cost of a course.
>
> Often there will be one price/Offer per CourseOffering so making price a
> property of CourseOffering makes sense.
>
> If CourseOffering is a subtype of Offer that would be true by default.


> Sometimes there will be variable prices per CourseOffering, so a single
> CourseOffering needs multiple Offers.
>
> This diverges from the established style/pattern in Schema.org - if the
price is different, it is a different offer.


> Looking at the examples (e.g. Fife Accounting), often the cost details are
> the same for multiple CourseOfferings and are specified in a separate HTML
> block from the CourseOfferings -- microdata and RDFa kind of struggle when
> information about a single entity is split over several blocks of HTML, so
> it would help if the cost could be set at Course level.
>

I understand the concerns about html formatting - in practice however these
are often overcome by the use of meta, link, and span elements.

Having pricing information at the Course level will introduce a 2nd pattern
of mark-up that will only work if there is a single price/offer.  This
’simpler’ pattern will also differ from the Schema.org established
patterns.  It will I suggest introduce confusion (*which pattern do I use
and why?*); potential for error (*I have a course with a price then add a
CourseOffering at a different price - which wins?*).  Dependant on website
navigation, a course description could potentially be on a separate page to
that of Offer(s) for that course - separating prices from offers is also
potentially error prone.

As previously mentioned, if there is

>
> What does this give us?
>
> Course needs an offers property
>
Would get it from CreativeWork


> CourseOffering needs an offers property
>
Disagree see above

For simplicity it would help if CourseOffering had a price property
>
Disagree - not necessary and could cause error/confusion


> If CourseOffering is a subtype of Offer, it seems strange that there
> should be multiple offers of an Offer, but actually
> http://schema.org/AggregateOffer gives a pattern that does just this.
>
> A useful Type, that could be used but, for reasons I describe above,
supported by your strange feelings, I don’t believe it should be on Offer
or any of its subtypes.


> Does that work for everyone?
>

Not quite for me.
~Ricard.

>
> Phil
>
> On 18/02/16 11:55, Richard Wallis wrote:
>
> +1 Wes.
>
> A great example of the benefits of creating sub-types of established
> Schema.org types - the ‘difficult to model’ use case has already been
> handled in an established pattern.
>
>
> Richard Wallis
> Founder, Data Liberate
> http://dataliberate.com
> Linkedin:  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
> Twitter: @rjw
>
> On 18 February 2016 at 01:05, Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://schema.org/Offer
>> + availabilityStarts
>> + availabilityEnds
>> + eligibleDuration
>> * priceSpecification
>> + priceValidUntil
>>
>> http://schema.org/PriceSpecification
>> + validFrom
>> + validTo
>>
>> ... so there would be multiple Offers for the same CourseOffering, IIUC.
>>
>> On Feb 17, 2016 6:10 PM, "Developer, SleepingDog" <
>> developer@sleepingdog.org.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all
>> >
>> > I think there is a case where a cost may be associated with (vary
>> dependent upon) a date.
>> >
>> > For example, the W3CDevCampus courses may be launched with an “early
>> bird” offer rate:
>> > https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/5293
>> >
>> > Perhaps that is too difficult to model.
>> >
>> > Tavis
>> >
>> > > On 10 Feb 2016, at 15:19, Phil Barker < <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>
>> phil.barker@hw.ac.uk> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hello Alan,
>> > > yes, you're absolutely right that cost can be very difficult.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Phil Barker           @philbarker
> LRMI, Cetis, ICBL     http://people.pjjk.net/phil
> Heriot-Watt University
>
> Ubuntu: http://xkcd.com/456/
>   not so much an operating system as a learning opportunity.
>
>