Re: Schema architecture

On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 at 01:25, Anthony Moretti <anthony.moretti@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone
>
> I was going through an earlier type hierarchy example I had posted and
> spotted a mistake, while updating it though I thought I should put it
> forward for serious consideration. I'm only new to the community so I
> don't want to make too many suggestions and give the wrong impression, and
> I understand the difficulty of changes, but the long term benefits seem
> significant.
>

Respectfully, we are pretty unlikely to make these kinds of substantive
changes. I'd be happy to have a call with you once I'm back at my desk
(travelling home from
https://www.poynter.org/news/fifth-global-fact-checking-summit-will-be-held-rome-june-2018
) to talk over some of the background to why Schema.org is taking the
approach it is. There's no huge secret, and much of it can be found in the
mail archives or in the ACM article
https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?ref=rss&id=2857276

Dan

(schema.org Community Group chair, and project 'webmaster
<http://schema.org/docs/howwework.html>')

Here is the outline:
>
> Due to lack of clear meaning I want to suggest removing the following
> high-level types and moving their properties higher in the type hierarchy:
>
>
>
>
>
> *CreativeWorkIntangibleProduct*
>
>
> And the same for these lower-level types:
>
>
>
> *CivicStructureLandmarksOrHistoricalBuildingsLocalBusiness*
>
>
> In my earlier example type hierarchy there was a missing type, equivalent
> to Class, which I've added here in orange. I've also marked where types of
> types would start, the pattern repeating as needed:
>
> *Thing*
> *    Article*
> *    Book*
> *    Event*
> *    Game*
> *    Language*
> *    Movie*
> *    MusicRecording*
> *    Organization*
> *    Painting*
> *    Person*
> *    Place*
> *        Airport*
> *        Bridge*
> *        Hospital*
> *        Museum*
> *        Park*
> *    Reservation*
> *    Ticket*
> *    Type*
> *        ThingType*
> *            ArticleType*
> *            BookType*
> *            EventType*
> *            GameType*
> *            LanguageType*
> *            MovieType*
> *            MusicRecordingType*
> *            OrganizationType*
> *            PaintingType*
> *            PersonType*
> *            PlaceType*
> *                AirportType*
> *                BridgeType*
> *                HospitalType*
> *                MuseumType*
> *                ParkType*
> *            ReservationType*
> *            TicketType*
> *            TypeType*
> *            VehicleType*
> *            WebPageType*
> *            WebSiteType*
> *    Vehicle*
> *    WebPage*
> *    WebSite*
>
>
> I've also corrected the example of properties being moved higher in the
> type hierarchy. Moving many properties to *Thing* and *Type* could
> improve the flexibility of Schema and its potential for cross-domain use:
>
> *Thing*
>     height
>     width
>     depth
>     weight
>     material
>     color
>     offers
>     predecessorOf
>     successorTo
>     variantOf
>         *Event*
>             startDate
>             endDate
>             duration
>         *Person*
>             givenName
>             familyName
>         *Place*
>             openingHoursSpecification
> *        Type*
>             heightOfTypicalInstances
>             widthOfTypicalInstances
>             depthOfTypicalInstances
>             weightOfTypicalInstances
>             materialOfTypicalInstances
>             colorOfTypicalInstances
>             offersOfTypicalInstances
>             predecessorTypeOf
>             successorTypeTo
>             variantTypeOf
>
>
> Similarly I've corrected the example that shows the pattern being applied
> - iPhone instances and iPhone types:
>
>
> *Thing*
> *    Phone*
> *        MobilePhone*
> *            iPhone*
> *                iPhone7*
> *                iPhone8*
> *                iPhoneX*
>                     iPhone X (serial number 00000001)
>                     iPhone X (serial number 00000002)
>                     iPhone X (serial number 00000003)
> *    Type*
> *        ThingType*
> *            PhoneType*
> *                MobilePhoneType*
> *                    iPhoneType*
>                         iPhone 7
>                         iPhone 8
>                         iPhone X
>
>
> With this approach you get the added benefit of no longer needing Product
> or its subtypes, which means:
>
>    - No undecidable questions about whether a type should be a subtype of
>    Product.
>    - No specialized logic, i.e. ProductModel subClassOf Product.
>    - No redundant types, i.e. IndividualProduct.
>
> Product and ProductModel could remain in Schema as long as needed, the
> description pages could perhaps be updated with a recommendation to use
> Thing and Type instead. Maybe supersededBy
> <https://meta.schema.org/supersededBy> statements could also be used here:
>
>    - *Product* supersededBy *Thing*
>    - *ProductModel* supersededBy *Type*
>
> Schema might become simpler and more scalable with this sort of approach.
>
> I'd love to get a number of views, and also discover if there's actually
> any demand for this sort of change.
>
> Anthony
>