Re: markup for underwriter or insurer

Anything that increments compliance would be an enabler for major corporate
sites.

I’ve ran into roadblocks with legal because of little things. Their
prerogative is that schema needs to be nearly standalone to be implemented.

This could be a good increment.

Alan

On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 3:00 AM Hugo Scott <hugo@hugoscott.com> wrote:

> Hello there
>
> Here in France some professions (this one is for a real estate agent) are
> required by law to declare their insurers or underwriters and I thought it
> might be interesting to try to mark it up in the structured data too. As
> there isn't a property like "underwrittenBy" or "insuredBy" I thought of
> trying to do it with an additional type like this:
>
>   "@type": "Service",
>           (... bla bla bla ...)
>   "additionalProperty":{
>   "name":"underwritten by",
>     "value":
>     {
>     "@type": "InsuranceAgency",
>         "name":"ALLIANZ",
>         "sameAs":"https://www.allianz.fr/",
>         "image":"https://www.allianz.fr/media/logo_allianz.png"
>     },
>     "sameAs":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance"
>   }
>
> However, it occurred to me that because the relationship between the two
> entities - the insurer and the insured company - is not clear (ie not
> officially defined), it may just be confusing matters to include another
> organization in the block of code
>
> What do you think? Is it worth putting the insuring company in?
>
> Thanks
>
> Hugo Scott
>
>
>
> <https://www.malt.fr/profile/hugoscott>
>
>