Vicki, I'm just saying it is not a real necessity because Event taken as something within a time boundary, covers it all. But if folks want to classify sub-Types of Events...sure, why not. I myself get very far just by using Thing's properties and the Event "about" property to classify sub-Types of Events. Which tells us we are doing things right on those levels at least, being able to model long-tail domains even with our existing classes and properties...although I understand for Roger, Allison, and others, it might be too much work for them. Sure, I'm fine with introducing a new class, where it could have correlationEvent as a new property, as in the following resource link. Just having these basic classes added into a new Schema.org extension could go a long way http://resource.geosciml.org/ontology/timescale/gts#classes -Thad On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 1:20 PM Vicki Tardif <vtardif@google.com> wrote: > To Roger's point, I think we should distinguish between events and ages or > eras. I think it is fine to call WWII an "event", but the Bronze Age or the > 1960s are more timeframes when events happened rather than the events > themselves. > > - Vicki > >
Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2018 19:01:46 UTC