Re: Proposal: BoatTerminal, BoatReservation, BoatTrip

Hello.

I'm a newbie and this is my first post to this list, so bear with me.

I'd like to add that different semantics of "name" seem to be at play. The description of trainName says "e.g. The Orient Express".

In contrast, it seems to me that boatName would usually refer to the name of a specific vessel. We see this kind of meaning for other types of transport vessels/vehicles, too. For example, the German airline Lufthansa names individual aircrafts. Similarly, Deutsche Bahn (the dominant German rail carrier) names individual trains of their high-speed series.

I realize that the names of individual aircrafts or trains will be irrelevant to most standard use cases. Boat names seem to be more relevant.

Examples from Germany because this is what I happen to know about. 

Not earth shattering insights, but perhaps still worth mentioning.

Cheers
Oliver


> On 11. Feb 2020, at 11:09, Magico Martinez <magico@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> Yes. I used boatName because we use properties such as trainName in https://schema.org/TrainTrip <https://schema.org/TrainTrip>. However, it's a fair point. We’ll use name instead of boatName and possibly identifier instead of boatNumber.
> 
> Magico
> 
>> On Feb 10, 2020, at 6:08 PM, Andrew Crimer <andrew.crimer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Surely we can just give our Boat a trusty old name <https://schema.org/name>?
>> 
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 12:39 PM Guha <guha@google.com <mailto:guha@google.com>> wrote:
>> 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 <mailto: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 <http://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/ <http://www.heppnetz.de/>
>> email: mhepp@computer.org <mailto:mhepp@computer.org>
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 10.02.2020 um 16:27 schrieb Magico Martinez <magico@apple.com <mailto: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/BoatTerminal>, http://schema.org/BoatReservation <http://schema.org/BoatReservation>, and http://schema.org/BoatTrip <http://schema.org/BoatTrip> which are consistent with other types. 
>>> 
>>> Proposal: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1755#issuecomment-583140913 <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1755#issuecomment-583140913> 
>>> 
>>> Would love to read any feedback or comments on this proposal. 
>>> 
>>> Magico Martinez
>