Re: Non-schema.org ontologies

consideration is about providing mechanics to teach local gov about
linked-data. by assisting in the discoverability of things like
publicAmenities (alongside recreation, and all sorts of other stuff) this
objective is obtained.
I believe interest exists in being able to produce schema.org ontology for
amenties - however, what i've then found is what looked like a very big
job.  So it makes sense to demonstrate the utility of ontologies for search
accessibility by using existing ontology; ie -
http://environmentontology.org/ - which has in it - toilets.

other ontologies also exist, alongside the means in which to make one then
do fun stuff around 'sameAs' referencing, et.al.

My original question was about what search indexs (for google now, siri,
and related functional outcomes) beyond the very commercial (and
incomplete) taxonomy currently provided by the rather extraordinary piece
of work done in schema.org.

I have not found your responses to be helpful and indeed at times also
unfortunate imho.




On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 at 14:40 Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:

> Timothy,
>
> We feel and support your cause, don't despair.  Vulnerable people are
> everywhere.
>
> This mailing list just probably won't help much with your agenda.  A
> political platform is probably best, of which this mailing list is far from
> it.
>
>
Your use case is less about Schema.org and more about thinking how a
> homeless person might use some service or kiosk to find a public toilet.
>

You brought up homeless people in a previous comment.  I suggest you review
your comment and put my response in perspective of those statements made by
you.


> It probably wouldn't be their cell phone, which doubtful they would have
> in their pockets, but they might.  Even further away from reality would be
> them carrying a laptop to use a browser.
>

Agreed. But out of scope here for now.  I would encourage Google and others
to consider the implications in relation to the credentialsCG works - but
again - for now, out of scope in relation to my initial question.

>
> I more likely scenario that would help those vulnerable and unfortunate
> would be public kiosks that could run those Apps or a locked down browser
> pointing to an OpenStreet maps layer of public toilet data or any other
> data.
>

I think your view about apps entirely misses the point when it comes to
emerging technology such as 'digital personal assistants' and i also think
you entirely miss the demographic - perhaps as a few women you know who've
been pregant - or some of your elders - and tell them it is your view
google has no business helping them find a toilet. (if i'm reading your
statements correctly?)


>
> My advice is to spend your energy towards something like that and drive
> your agenda in social spaces and politicians front doors.
>

You have no idea... If you are actually interested, feel welcome to get in
touch.  yet for now, the main thing is that public data as provided by
data.gov.au is not being indexed by search effectively and to solve that
should not be a big problem.

I also believe some taxonomy could well be included into schema.org -
however it makes sense to me, that ontologies are broadly considered; and
in-turn, a better understanding of what schema.org should support can be
better understood.

I'll try doing it the way I think will work and as i continue to condense
down the ontology areas that may be better supported by schemaorg directly;
will make you aware of it.

there is alot of talk about autonomousVehicles - have people considered
wheelchairs to be one such type of vehicle - or aids for those with vision
problems to have similiar IoT / WoT related requirements.

I imagine these sorts of things may interplay with the means in which
indoor positioning systems are promoted.

anyhow.  'in the interests of the people'.

Tim.H./

>
> All the best,
>
> Thad
> +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
>
>