Re: Proposal: BoatTerminal, BoatReservation, BoatTrip

Martin, I am not sure I agree about forcing everything related to vehicles
into a general model for vehicles.

I think it is a very good idea to have the concepts of Boat, Helicopter,
etc. My issue was with specific properties such as boatName. There will be
properties that are specific to boats, specific to planes, specific to
electric vehicles, etc. but I don't think name is one of them.

guha

On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 8:52 AM Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com> wrote:

> IMO, we should try to focus on a generic vocabulary for all kinds if trips
> and not create subtypes for each type of vehicle. A common conceptual model
> for boat, bus, helicopter, passenger plane, etc. trips should be doable,
> and we will actually already have necessary elements in schema.org.
>
> We only need subtypes if the computational handling by major consumers of
> the data will be based on the new distinction. Also, subtypes make
> composite trips and trips with an unspecified means on transportation
> cumbersome to model.
>
> ---------------------------------------
> martin hepp
> www:  http://www.heppnetz.de/
> email: mhepp@computer.org
>
>
> Am 10.02.2020 um 16:27 schrieb Magico Martinez <magico@apple.com>:
>
> 
> As fili spotted <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1755> (back
> in 2017!) the current vocabulary has types for buses, trains, taxis, etc
> but it’s missing any vocabulary around boat trips or boat reservations.
>
> I’ve put together a proposal for this. It would add
> http://schema.org/BoatTerminal, http://schema.org/BoatReservation, and
> http://schema.org/BoatTrip which are consistent with other types.
>
> Proposal:
> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1755#issuecomment-583140913
>
> Would love to read any feedback or comments on this proposal.
>
> Magico Martinez
>
>