- From: Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:39:25 -0500
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Cc: Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>, public-schema-course-extend@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CACfEFw81z-ZnEmpajj5-CZmKs-r-jtR7acTTnJD9U7oWKmTBdA@mail.gmail.com>
Fair enough. What's likely going to occur here, then, is something like with https://health-lifesci.schema.org/MedicalStudy - MedicalStudy exists because experts took the time to develop an excellent domain-specific vocabulary - ScientificStudy does not yet exist - ScientificStudy is a proper superclass of MedicalStudy - domains and ranges will then need to be widened to accomodate https://health-lifesci.schema.org/MedicalTrialDesign <- ScientificTrialDesign (or ScientificStudyDesign, StudyDesign) - MedicalTrialDesign > RandomizedTrial - StudyDesign > MedicalTrialDesign > RandomizedTrial - StudyDesign > RandomizedStudy So, while I share the concerns about scope creep ( https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1127 ) I hesitate to make this overly domain specific because we want it now when very simple abstract Credential and CredentialInstance (or CredentialAssertion) superclasses now could save much re-work and schema confusion later. C: Thing > CreativeWork > Credential - P: issuer (d: {Credential, CredentialInstance}, r: {Person, Organization, CredentialInstance}) C: CredentialAssertion (was CredentialInstance) - P: recipient ( https://schema.org/recipient ) - P: credential (d: {CredentialAssertion,}, r: {Credential}) This effort is part of a broader scope; without a base class, class expansions wont work consistently. On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote: > On 20 June 2016 at 19:51, Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk> wrote: > > > > In the long run you may be right, Wes. However, my proposal is that we > don't > > need to do credentials in order to describe Course. We can, and should, > > leave that to people who know more about credentials, as a separate > effort. > > We don't need to wait for that, we can add in what works for now, and > > improve later. > > +1 > > > Phil > > > > On 20/06/16 18:49, Wes Turner wrote: > >> > >> P: educationalCredentialAwarded > >> d: Course > >> r: {Text, Thing} > >> > >> Should this be > >> > >> P: credentialAwarded > >> d: > >> r: {Credential, CredentialInstance} > >> > >> P: educationalCredentialAwarded (subPropertyOf) credentialAwarded > >> d: Course > >> r: {EducationalCredential, CredentialInstance} > >> > >> ... > >> > >> Credential > EducationalCredential > Degree > >> Credential > EducationalCredential > Degree > BachelorDegree > >> Credential > EducationalCredential > Certificate > >> Credential > EducationalCredential > Certification > >> Credential > EducationalCredential > Badge > OpenBadge > >> Credential > EducationalCredential > Badge > cert-schema (OpenBadge + > >> blockchain) > >> > >> *Are there instances where e.g. Certificate, Certification, and Badge* > >> *are not EducationalCredentials* > >> *(just regular Credentials)?* > >> > >> So, > >> EducationalCredential may be more useful as an annotation class? > >> > >> CTI models this as credType, which requires a WHERE _ IN query to list > >> things of this type (because there's no expansions of class lineage > without > >> Enumerated classes which are a subClassOf e.g. Credential or > >> EducationalCredential or Degree or Certificate): > >> * > https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/195#issuecomment-222379559 > >> > >> Scope justification: > >> - > https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/195#issuecomment-223663304 > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 8:05 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk > >> <mailto:phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>> wrote: > >> > >> On 20/06/16 12:26, Dan Brickley wrote: > >> > >> On 17 June 2016 at 17:32, Steve Midgley > >> <steve@learningtapestry.com > >> <mailto:steve@learningtapestry.com>> wrote: > >> > >> I agree that credential has many meanings across > >> industries. I agree we > >> should try to find a term that unambiguously locates this > >> credential as > >> educational. So, being a frequent simpleton, I'll suggest > >> "educationalCredential" > >> > >> This is an improvement. > >> > >> A friend I was talking to over the weekend suggested using the > >> related > >> term "accreditation". How does that sound to this community? To > my > >> ears it has all the right associations, and is much less > >> evocative of > >> lower-level technical notions of credential... > >> > >> Dan > >> > >> OK. As property name I am going to suggest > >> educationalCredentialAwarded because we might in the future want > >> EducationalCredential as a class name. > >> > >> So, my proposal is that in order to meet the use case that people > >> can search for courses that offers a qualification the searcher > >> would like to acquire we create a new property > >> > >> educationalCredentialAwarded domain Course, range Text or Thing. > >> Definition: a description of the qualification, award, > >> certificate, diploma or other educational credential awarded as a > >> consequence of successful completion of this course. > >> > >> When the educational credentials/verifiable claims community have > >> sorted out how they want to describe their domain in schema.org > >> <http://schema.org> then I hope we will have some more specific > >> schema type(s) that we can point to, but for now this seems to me > >> to be good enough to solve the use case. Solving the bigger issue > >> seems beyond the scope of this community group. > >> > >> > >> Phil > >> > >> -- -- > >> 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. > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > -- > > 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. > > > > >
Received on Monday, 20 June 2016 20:39:56 UTC