Re: Schema.org v3.1 release candidate (sdo-makemake branch) - please review for release in 1-2 weeks

On 8 August 2016 at 08:08, Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr> wrote:
> A few minor things I have spotted while looking at raw data at
> http://webschemas.org/docs/developers.html#defs following discussion at
> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1277 :
>
> "Dentist" is still under "ProfessionalService"; reading the comment on that
> entry, I am wondering whether this is correct or not; is should probably be
> moved in the health extension;

It looks like this went backwards and forwards between core and the
health-lifesci extension (several local business-related terms were
moved back to core). There was also some debate around "Dentistry"
which *is* part of the health-lifesci extension,
http://health-lifesci.webschemas.org/Dentistry

Taking a quick look at the files: the file data/schema.rdfa (which
defines the core), has this:

    <div typeof="rdfs:Class" resource="http://schema.org/Dentist">
      <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">Dentist</span>
      <span property="rdfs:comment">A dentist.</span>
      <span>Subclass of: <a property="rdfs:subClassOf"
href="http://schema.org/MedicalOrganization">MedicalOrganization</a></span>
      <span>Subclass of: <a property="rdfs:subClassOf"
href="http://schema.org/ProfessionalService">
schema:ProfessionalService</a</span>
    </div>

the file  data/ext/health-lifesci/med-health-core.rdfa has just this:

(the extension distinguishes medical organizations from medical
businesses, a nuance I'm not 100% sure is useful)

<div typeof="rdfs:Class" resource="http://schema.org/Dentist">
  <span>Subclass of: <a property="rdfs:subClassOf"
href="http://schema.org/MedicalBusiness">MedicalBusiness</a></span>
</div>

... which is our way to express that "from the perspective added by
the health-lifesci layer", the Dentist type is (also) a subtype of
MedicalBusiness. We do it this way because we don't want the core to
include references to things that are only defined in the various
extensions.

On the question of where it most properly lives, there is no perfect
answer since life is untidy. My instinct here is that it is reasonable
for a few health-related terms to remain in core, and for the
extension to focus on "going deep" into that domain. So we also have
left e.g. /Hospital in the core as a term of general mainstream
interest, whereas fine detail like DrugCostCategory,
Gastroenterologic,  RespiratoryTherapy,
MedicalObservationalStudyDesign is better off in an extension.

So I think it stays in the core but since "ProfessionalService" has
been retired as a type, we ought to move it up into LocalBusiness and
MedicalOrganization (but still within the core).  I'll go ahead and
make that change; leaving it in that type was an oversight.

> "Dentist" starts with a space in the source RDFa file;

Could you give an exact pointer? I'm not seeing the space in the most
recent files. We did make some fixes addressing this recently, and we
have a test that should ensure that term IDs and labels match:
https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/blob/sdo-makemake/tests/test_graphs.py#L204

> The labels and comments from bib extension have "@en" language, while labels
> and comments in the core don't have a language associated;

Good point - noted in https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1282

Thanks for your careful review!

cheers,

Dan

Received on Monday, 8 August 2016 21:45:35 UTC