W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-schemaorg@w3.org > June 2022

Re: The Existence, Presence, Fictitiousness of a Thing as a Property?

From: Martin Bean <martin@martinbean.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2022 19:14:57 +0100
Message-Id: <3F724B81-B401-4130-A217-870053D7066A@martinbean.co.uk>
Cc: Hans Polak <info@polak.es>, public-schemaorg@w3.org
To: Jason Pelish <jason@massiveimpressions.com>
“character” isn’t a type. It’s a property of the CreativeWork type. If you look at https://schema.org/character <https://schema.org/character>, it says that values are still expected to be of the type Person.

> On 20 Jun 2022, at 19:09, Jason Pelish <jason@massiveimpressions.com> wrote:
> 
> Thank you for pointing that out.  I was not aware of Character. In fact, I believed Person had no sub-types. What would be the name for a Person who isn't a character. 
> 
> I was thinking about this more in the context of Patanjali's sutras on types of Knowledge and whether knowledge is first hand or second hand.  
> 
> I was thinking about these qualifications, these values for a yet-to-be-named Property of Thing:
> 
> The general idea is that the existence of things should be qualified. 
> 
> In cases of publishing SD the publisher is aware of existence of the thing being described via:
> A. 3rd or greater party accounts & testimony
> B. Direct 2nd hand testimony from people with first hand experience. 
> C. 1st hand experience of a said thing
> D. Naught HAND experience when the describer is the described, when the Schema is for Person and the Person is the Publisher/Author
> 
> Also when something is know to be fictional we can qualify it as 
> 1. Testimony of having invented, imagined or described a thing without bringing a real world instance of the thing into existence. 
> 2. 2nd hand acounts of people who have claimed to invent, imagine or describe the thing being described. 
> 3. Accounts of the thing being described where the origin or existence is uncertain. 
> 
> For example, what could be more authoritative information about a Person above what comes from the Person themselves?  Who would be more certain that Harry Potter isn't a real wizard lad than J.K. Rowling? Hearing from the actual person "I am real" and hearing from the inventor of a character "this is all from my imagination" is a lot more reliable than hearing from other sources. No? 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022, 12:04 PM Hans Polak <info@polak.es <mailto:info@polak.es>> wrote:
> Good afternoon,
> 
> I'm not an expert, but https://schema.org/character <https://schema.org/character> is for fictional characters.
> 
> Then, there's also https://schema.org/Intangible <https://schema.org/Intangible>, and https://schema.org/object <https://schema.org/object>.
> 
> The https://schema.org/Class <https://schema.org/Class> type also exists.
> 
> 
> Yours sincerely,
> Hans Polak
> 
> 
> On 19/6/22 1:20, jason@massiveimpressions.com <mailto:jason@massiveimpressions.com> wrote:
>> Hello Everyone,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> The schema for Person is described to be applicable to: 
>> “A person (alive, dead, undead, or fictional).”
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> But… what Property of Person, or any other Thing for that matter, indicates whether the Thing actually exists, is instanced in reality, has real presence as opposed to being only entirely imaginary or fictional?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Shouldn’t this be explicit, not implied by other Properties or some other Type or Sub-type?  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> -JP
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Jason Pelish
>> 
>> Founding Partner – Marketer
>> 
>> Massive Impressions Online Marketing
>> 
>> Boca Raton, FL 33431
>> 
>> (561) 232-2424
>> 
>> (866) 800-3579
>> https://2vu.me/m <https://2vu.me/m> - Massive Impressions site
>> 
>> https://2vu.me/C <https://2vu.me/C> - The Click Whisperer site
>> 
>> https://4boca.com <https://4boca.com/> – 4boca Local site
>> 
>>  
>> 


Received on Monday, 20 June 2022 18:15:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 20 June 2022 18:15:24 UTC