- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:57:33 -0700
- To: Anthony Moretti <anthony.moretti@gmail.com>, Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com>
- Cc: Simon Cox <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, public-schemaorg@w3.org
Indeed. I view Allison as a representative of real users who would want to
use schema.org to represent historical events.
Now maybe her use case isn't one that schema.org will cover. If so, let's
have an authoritative statement to that effect and she and many of us can go
somewhere else.
Or maybe the authoritative word is that event covers attendee events,
historical events, named periods, and any extended period of time and that
only very limited subtypes are possible. If so, let's have a list of these
subtypes and then she can figure out whether they are suitable for her.
Or maybe there is work to be done in representing historical events and
periods of time. If so, this discussion appears to be relevant to potential
significant uses of schema.org.
Or maybe the schema.org types and properties are just hints, no one should
take their descriptions seriously, and consuming schema.org is mostly an
exercise in matching schema.org entities to entities in existing repositories
of information.
peter
On 06/20/2018 12:22 PM, Anthony Moretti wrote:
> The name of this thread is "Historical events" and people are asking
> questions about real problems they are facing, am I or others off topic
> somehow?
>
> Anthony
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:15 PM Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com
> <mailto:mfhepp@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Please, please, please - let us try to go back to discussing tangible
> improvements of the schema.org <http://schema.org> vocabulary in the
> context of being the center of a giant, heteorgeneous data ecosystem
> with real users and real applications on this mailing list.
>
> I am sure there are lots of subscribers to this list who are interested
> in using schema.org <http://schema.org> for tangible business purposes
> in their day jobs. They are likely not just not interested in very
> fundamental conceptual modeling discussions, they likely feel out of
> place and might be lost for this community.
>
> And there are other forums where you will find way more resonance, like
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/ontolog-forum
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21forum/ontolog-forum>
>
> There are so many wonderful ways of making schema.org
> <http://schema.org> a better place for everyone, e.g. by crafting
> examples for the many elements that still lack them, or by translating
> examples into other missing syntaxes, or by spotting small, fixable
> inconsistencies in terms of wording or even formal semantics.
>
> A pull request on GitHub is worth a thousand words...
>
> Maybe you want to start "A Hitchiker's Guide to Schema.org", same as the
> excellent
>
> http://docs.python-guide.org/en/latest/
>
> initiated by the great Kenneth Reitz. It just takes setting up a bit of
> infrastructure, like so
>
> https://github.com/kennethreitz/python-guide
>
> and then dedicated contributors. The Python variant has 341 authors as
> of today, who have kept alive one of the greatest pieces of support for
> Python developers over almost a decade.
>
> If you are interested, watch
>
> https://www.kennethreitz.org/talks#/documentation-at-scale/
>
> and let us apply this to schema.org <http://schema.org>.
>
> It will help thousands of developers, and will matter for them more than
> fine-tuning the definition of a single element from a subjective point
> of view.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Martin
>
>
> > On 20 Jun 2018, at 20:38, Anthony Moretti <anthony.moretti@gmail.com
> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I tend to agree with Mike and Simon, from a modeling point of view
> it's all the same thing so maybe it's just the definition that needs to
> be clarified and more subtypes added. The current definition and current
> subtypes give the impression that it has a somewhat narrow meaning.
> >
> > The link Mike provided, and this authoritative article describe the
> very broad meaning "event" can have:
> >
> > https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/events/
> >
> > So perhaps the Schema definition could start with the dictionary
> definition then explicitly mention its broad applicability:
> >
> > https://schema.org/Event
> > A thing that happens, especially one of importance.
> > In addition to typical events, instances can be periods of time,
> activities, actions, and processes, etc.
> >
> > A definition like the above, combined with new subtypes suggested by
> Allison and others, might make people more comfortable using it in more
> ways than they might currently.
> >
> > Anthony
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 4:17 AM Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> <pfpschneider@gmail.com <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > So then World War 2 is not an event, and June (the repeating period) is.
> >
> >
> > peter
> >
> >
> >
> > On 06/19/2018 06:36 PM, Simon.Cox@csiro.au wrote:
> > > That is signified by the fact that '19 June 2018' doesn't have a
> name, only an index.
> > >
> > > An 'event' that happened on that day would probably have a name
> relating to the activity.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider [mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com
> <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 20 June, 2018 11:17
> > > To: public-schemaorg@w3.org <mailto:public-schemaorg@w3.org>
> > > Subject: Re: Historical events
> > >
> > > I think that ages are qualitatively different from events. Consider
> a very short age - 19 June 2018. As far as I am concerned that is not
> an event.
> > >
> > >
> > > peter
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 06/19/2018 05:06 PM, Anthony Moretti wrote:
> > >> Look, I'm no temporal expert or anything, but maybe the problem is in
> > >> English it could be a continuum from "event" to "period" as the
> > >> interval of time being named gets longer, with no clear boundary.
> > >>
> > >> Mike's birthday party - an event
> > >> The Middle Ages - a period
> > >>
> > >> Because from a data modeling point of view they're the same (at least
> > >> as far as my modeling knowledge goes).
> > >>
> > >> So an unpopular solution I'm guessing would be to rename the type to
> > >> *EventOrPeriod*.
> > >>
> > >> So your previous example:
> > >>
> > >> The Black Death
> > >> superEventOrPeriod: The Middle Ages
> > >>
> > >> People's ideas?
> > >>
> > >> Anthony
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 4:10 PM Richard Wallis
> > >> <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com
> <mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
> > >> <mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com
> <mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>>>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Anthony,
> > >>
> > >> I’m not following your logic here. I don’t see a Period (of
> time from a
> > >> start time/date to an end date/time) as an event.
> > >>
> > >> ~Richard.
> > >>
> > >> Richard Wallis
> > >> Founder, Data Liberate
> > >> http://dataliberate.com
> > >> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
> > >> Twitter: @rjw
> > >>
> > >> On 20 June 2018 at 00:05, Anthony Moretti
> <anthony.moretti@gmail.com <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com>
> > >> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com
> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> That definitely works, but only if some definition of
> Period was
> > >> agreed on.
> > >>
> > >> The property periodEventOccurred would be a subproperty of
> > >> superEvent in any case:
> > >>
> > >> superEvent
> > >>
> > >> periodEventOccurred
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> So you could describe the same information using the
> existing term
> > >> right?
> > >>
> > >> The Black Death
> > >>
> > >> superEvent: The Middle Ages
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Anthony
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 3:50 PM Richard Wallis
> > >> <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com
> <mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
> > >> <mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com
> <mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Using a Period Type I would suggest a cleaner
> alternative way of
> > >> saying an event occurred during a period would be like
> this:
> > >>
> > >> {
> > >> "@context": "http://schema.org",
> > >> "@type": "Event",
> > >> "name": "The Black Death",
> > >> "Description": "A pandemic that spread throughout Europe",
> > >> "periodEventOccured": {
> > >> "@type": "Period",
> > >> "name": "The Middle Ages",
> > >> "approximateStartDate": "400AD",
> > >> "approximateEndDate":"1500AD"
> > >> }
> > >> }
> > >>
> > >> On 19 June 2018 at 23:41, Anthony Moretti
> > >> <anthony.moretti@gmail.com
> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com
> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com>>>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I was referencing the development version of Schema, I
> > >> should probably reference production, sorry Roger:
> > >>
> > >> * https://schema.org/subEvent
> > >> * https://schema.org/superEvent
> > >>
> > >> To say some event happened during the Iron Age for
> example:
> > >>
> > >> Invention of iron plow
> > >> superEvent: Iron Age
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Anthony
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 3:05 PM Muri, Allison
> > >> <allison.muri@usask.ca
> <mailto:allison.muri@usask.ca> <mailto:allison.muri@usask.ca
> <mailto:allison.muri@usask.ca>>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The google Cloud host is really slow and I
> think the 404
> > >> is a result of something loading too slowly. I
> could
> > >> probably publish this more reliably on my own
> website! I
> > >> generally just wait a bit and reload the page.
> Sorry
> > >> about that.
> > >>
> > >> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>
> > >> On Jun 19, 2018, at 3:58 PM, Roger Rohrbach
> > >> <roger@ecstatic.com <mailto:roger@ecstatic.com>
> <mailto:roger@ecstatic.com <mailto:roger@ecstatic.com>>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I get 404 Not Found for both of those pages.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Jun 19, 2018, at 11:50 AM, Anthony Moretti
> > >>>> <anthony.moretti@gmail.com
> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com>
> > >>>> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com
> <mailto:anthony.moretti@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Isn't it already modeled by these properties?:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * https://webschemas.org/subEvent
> > >>>> * https://webschemas.org/superEvent
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Events can exist in part-whole hierarchies,
> aren't
> > >>>> named periods just events high in these
> hierarchies?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Anthony
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2018 19:58:02 UTC