Re: Toy proposal

> On 16 Apr 2015, at 15:54, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Now, let's get back to the Toy EXTENSION (not Proposal) needs.
> 
> What properties do you feel are necessary for that Domain and folks that touch that Domain (including libraries) ?

I think this is the question I was trying to ask of those supporting the inclusion of a Toy type in this extension. 

I’m coming up empty - I think Toys can be adequately described to the extent libraries need to describe them using existing schema.org types and properties. Taking the first item in Jeff’s previous ‘Toy’ examples from WorldCat (http://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=worldcat_org_all&q=dog#x0%253Atoy-format)

Forgive any errors in the markup but wouldn’t this suffice:

{
  "@context": "http://schema.org",
  "@id": "#product",
  "@type": "IndividualProduct",
  "additionalType": "http://www.productontology.org/id/Toy",
  "description": “Dog hand puppet : plush fabric, b&w ; 29 cm., in plastic hang-up bag 39 cm x 26 cm.",
  "name": "Dog",
  "manufacturer": [
    {
        "@type": "Organization",
        "name": "Elka",
        "address": {
          "@type": "Postal Address",
          "addressLocality": "Sydney, N.S.W."
        }
    }
  ],
  "releaseDate": "2012"
}