Re: Extension proposal for TouristAttraction class

Right, I understand your reasons for addeding those extra Classes to
TouristAttraction.  Even a Bathroom could be a TouristLocation if it is of
some historic importance, or The Beatles touched it :)  But you probably
don't want those subclasses, and if you do, its better to specify the
special class with a prefix like "FamousBathroom".

I think being a bit more strict could help with a Tourists assumptions.
Those Tourists that are interested in Hair Salons or Haunted Ghost Tours
will typically search for them directly.

Most search engines already are tuned for "things to do" or "attractions",
etc.

Google Search "miami south beach florida things to do"

Lincoln Road is a long walkway of shops and considered a Tourist Attraction
and a place to shop.

There are many shopping locations in South Beach, Miami, Florida... but
only a few considered Tourist worthy of your time and hence considered
Famous or a Tourist Attraction.

I would emphasis the term "Famous" and not something like "Popular" or
otherwise to avoid confusion with local popularity.  So the
ShoppingLocation Class could be renamed "FamousShoppingLocation".  Saying
"TouristShoppingLocation" might give the feeling of a place like a souvenir
shop or place to buy trinkets.  So I would avoid "Tourist" as well.

In my opinion, the class names that are long in example here but more
accurate to reality would be FamousShoppingLocations ,
Famous"Historic"SportsActivityLocations, and FamousSpasResorts, etc.

Another sub layer for a TouristAttraction is the "Historic" aspect.
Anything could eventually be Historic and eventually become Popular and
eventually a TouristLocation.  Since anything can be Historic...that might
be something to better fit at a Property level and not a Class.  So I would
work on that also in this extension.

I think "Famous" and "Historic" are the right mental models that your
student is probably trying to classify.  So don't subclass all kinds of
things, but instead just create parent classes of "FamousLocation" and
"HistoricLocation"

-> Location -> FamousLocation -> HistoricLocation

And then any Thing can be additionally Typed (MTE - Multi Typed Entity)  as
them.
Since any Location can be classed as those, then what needs figuring out is
not all those potential subclasses that "might be considered a
TouristAttraction", but instead figure out what Properties need to be under
FamousLocation and HistoricLocation.

I think that effort would be the most useful work for this extension
proposal and Schema.org because we already have the
http://schema.org/TouristAttraction class with some nice properties, but
what properties are missing that might be useful ?  Find those out and you
make a lot of other folks happy.

To get your student started...
One property that I personally would enjoy seeing is something like
"visitCost" or perhaps a Boolean like "freeVisit" Y/N because the only way
to Cost something in Schema.org currently is to have it as an Offer.  Then
is there something under http://schema.org/LandmarksOrHistoricalBuildings that
is missing ?  Does LandmarksOrHistoricalBuildings cover everything
visitable under a historic context ?  Great Wall of China is a landmark and
historic.  Are there Things that are Historic and visitable that are NOT a
landmark or building ?  Find that out.



On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 6:52 AM Angelica Lo Duca <angelica.loduca@iit.cnr.it>
wrote:

> Dear Thad,
> thanks for your quick reply!
>
> You're right, a HairSalon is generally considered as a famous place and
> not as a typical tourist attraction, but we think that in some cases, it
> can be possible that a person or a group of persons decide to move and stay
> overnight to another city (one of the conditions to talk about tourism) for
> the pleasure of visiting (another of essential conditions of tourism) a
> specific hair salon and, maybe, other attractions in the surroundings. It's
> for these reasons that we added these Classes to TouristAttraction.
>
> However, if we wanted to be more strict, we should re-think about three
> classes: HealthAndBeautyBusiness, SportsActivityLocation and
> ShoppingLocation. In particular, we could remove completely the
> ShoppingLocation Class as a sub class of TouristAttraction and maintain
> only a few sub classes of HealthAndBeautyBusiness and
> SportsActivityLocation, such as DaySpa, ThermalBath, SkiResort,
> BowlingAlley.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Angelica
>
>  Angelica Lo Duca, PhD
> Web Applications for the Future Internet Lab.
> Institute of Informatics and Telematics
> National Research Council
> Via Giuseppe Moruzzi,
> 56124 Pisa (Italy)
>
> http://www.iit.cnr.it/angelica.loduca
> Tel. +39 050 315 8292 <+39%20050%20315%208292>
> Skype, Twitter, Github: alod83
>
> Il giorno 03/nov/2016, alle ore 17:57, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
> ha scritto:
>
> Nice,
>
> But there are a few classes that seem to be outside the realm of a typical
> TouristAttraction.  Like HairSalon ?  I have yet to visit any famous Hair
> Salons.  I know some do exist, but I would consider them just a Famous
> Place, or Attraction.  Not something you would see in a guidebook or Travel
> agency magazine or itinerary.
>
> It looks like this structure attempts to collect not just a typical
> TouristAttraction that a vacationing person or family might be interested
> in, but instead something more like classes that could be considered a
> "Famous Place" ?
>
> The word Tourist means someone traveling to a place for pleasure.  Some of
> the listed classes would be marginally pleasurable for some people, but
> certainly still retain a Famous indication.
>
> So I would lean to renaming to something like FamousAttraction or
> similar..or just Attraction.
> Then again...anything Famous typically gets flocked by Tourists
> eventually. :)
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 10:35 AM Angelica Lo Duca <
> angelica.loduca@iit.cnr.it> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> one of my students, Elisabetta Triolo, is working on a proposal of a host
> extension for the TouristAttraction class of Schema.org
> <http://schema.org/>.
> She studied the structure of some important tourism platforms such as
> TripAdvisor <https://www.tripadvisor.it/>, ParisInfo
> <http://www.parisinfo.com/>, Gogobot <https://www.gogobot.com/>, and she
> tried to define what a tourist attraction is, by reading information and
> publications such as the Wikipedia definition
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourist_attraction>, the Lorenzo Canova’s study
> of attractions
> <http://www00.unibg.it/dati/corsi/3091/12779-Il%20prodotto%20turistico.pdf>,
> Lucia Varra’s article
> <https://books.google.it/books?id=5tKk5ElLyhwC&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=La+destinazione+turistica+come+prodotto++di+relazioni+operative+e+cognitive:+il+ruolo++dell%E2%80%99OTD+nel+governo+delle+relazioni++interorganizzative+e+nei+processi+di+sviluppo++del+territorio&source=bl&ots=HB-XpGTL75&sig=ASp7Os5xL0SrFZt2mLIAJpN8iJg&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi9q6mo15PPAhUEKsAKHZiGB_kQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q&f=false>
> about tourist destination.
> The whole extension has been published here
> <http://tourism.sdo-touristattr-extension.appspot.com/TouristAttraction>.
> In addition, an owl version of the extension is available here
> <https://github.com/alod83/tourpedia-attraction/blob/master/ontology/schemaorgTouristAttraction.owl>
> and it’s possible to find an explanation of the project here
> <https://github.com/alod83/schemaorg_tourist_attraction/wiki>.
>
> It’s important for us to have feedback from the community, in order to
> improve the structure of the class and its subclasses, and, hopefully, add
> this as an host extension of the Schema.org <http://schema.org/> project.
> Thanks in advance for your attention,
> Angelica
>
> Angelica Lo Duca, PhD
> Web Applications for the Future Internet Lab.
> Institute of Informatics and Telematics
> National Research Council
> Via Giuseppe Moruzzi,
> 56124 Pisa (Italy)
>
> http://www.iit.cnr.it/angelica.loduca
> Tel. +39 050 315 8292 <+39%20050%20315%208292>
> Skype, Twitter, Github: alod83
>
>
>