Re: Scores for head to head events

Hello,

Some comments inline:

On 25/11/2015 08:55, "Richard Wallis" <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com<mailto:richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>> wrote:

From <http://schema.org/Action>

“An action performed”…”The execution of the action may produce a result”

I would suggest that winning the Booker prize was an action that occurred, or was completed, though it might not have been previously defined [by the eventual winner] as a potential action.

Yes I agree. It's the outcome of the action not a potential outcome. In the same way, the score can be the outcome of a sports competition.

Nevertheless, I think the definition of a SportsResult concept is needed either if it's used in the Actions or directly in the competition. I was looking into the Actions modelling, because it already provides a general result predicate and it also has some modelling in actions around Win and Loss so it can be reused in a head to head competition.


On 24 November 2015 at 14:47, Paul Kelly <paul@xmlteam.com<mailto:paul@xmlteam.com>> wrote:
Also, I see below that this means distinguishing between the agent and the participant?

Yes, in actions, the agent is distinguished from the participant.  I think the agent it is the subject of the action.

Many thanks,
Eleni



On 24 November 2015 at 14:47, Paul Kelly <paul@xmlteam.com<mailto:paul@xmlteam.com>> wrote:
Are those outcomes really actions, though? A team sets out to win and acts accordingly but there’s no intention to lose. Somebody writes a book (to use schema.org<http://schema.org>’s "*John* wrote a book" example) but the action wasn’t directly to win the Booker prize. Also, I see below that this means distinguishing between the agent and the participant?


> On Nov 23, 2015, at 12:43 PM, Eleni Mikroyannidi <Eleni.Mikroyannidi@bbc.co.uk<mailto:Eleni.Mikroyannidi@bbc.co.uk>> wrote:
>
> I was wondering if we could make use of the Action concept for representing head to head actions/results. Schema.org already has the concept of WinAction, TieAction and LoseAction. In this case, a football WinAction could be modelled as:
>
> <!--  Liverpool won a football competition against Crystal Palace. -->
> <script type="application/ld+json">
> {
>   "@context": "http://schema.org",
>   "@type": "WinAction",
>   "agent": {
>     "@type": "SportsTeam",
>     "name": "Liverpool",
>     "@id": "https://dbpedia.org/resource/Liverpool_F.C."
>   },
>   "object": {
>    "@type": "SportsEvent",
>     "name": "Barclays Premier League Liverpool v Crystal Palace"
>   },
>  "result": "2-0",
>  "agentScore": 2,
>   "participantScore": 0,
>   "participant": {
>     "@type": "SportsTeam",
>     "name": "Crystal Palace",
>     "@id": "https://dbpedia.org/resource/Crystal_Palace_F.C."
>   }
> }
> </script>
>
> The Action concept has the general https://schema.org/result  predicate, which can be used within any Action. A SportsResult could be defined within that context.
>
> Cheers,
> Eleni
>
> On 23/11/2015 10:14, "Tom Grahame" <tom.grahame@bbc.co.uk<mailto:tom.grahame@bbc.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>>
>> For info and not intended to sway the conversation in any particular direction:
>>
>> home/awayCompetitor lifts from the Sport ontology:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/sport#terms_homeCompetitor

>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/sport#terms_awayCompetitor

>>
>> There’s a gist I did a while ago here:
>> https://gist.github.com/tfgrahame/8974800

>>
>> Scoring gets hard when scores can be applied variously to events and/or competitors, we got stuck on this last time.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> From: Daniel Stieglitz <dstieglitz@stainlesscode.com<mailto:dstieglitz@stainlesscode.com>>
>> Date: Friday, 20 November 2015 16:25
>> To: Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com<mailto:vtardif@google.com>>
>> Cc: Paul Kelly <paul@xmlteam.com<mailto:paul@xmlteam.com>>, Jonathan Balls <Jonathan.Balls@bbc.co.uk<mailto:Jonathan.Balls@bbc.co.uk>>, "public-sport-schema@w3.org<mailto:public-sport-schema@w3.org>" <public-sport-schema@w3.org<mailto:public-sport-schema@w3.org>>
>> Subject: Re: Scores for head to head events
>> Resent-From: <public-sport-schema@w3.org<mailto:public-sport-schema@w3.org>>
>> Resent-Date: Friday, 20 November 2015 16:26
>>
>>> Hi folks:
>>>
>>> SportsEvent also supports the SportsEvent-->competitor relationship, where competitor can be SportsTeam or Person. Oddly enough this seems to be the way homeTeam and awayTeam are also mapped which seems confusing (they can be Persons?)
>>>
>>> Perhaps homeTeam and awayTeam should be refactored out and replaced by the competitor relationship, where cardinality is enforced by subtypes (e.g., if SportsEvent is a FootballGame, competitor max cardinality is 2 and competitor types are restricted to Team).
>>>
>>> For results I think a CompetitorResult object may be required (or CompetitorScore [subclass?]) that is then applied to the Event object.
>>>
>>> Of course the issue of tracking how the CompetitorScore might change over time is also a consideration.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com<mailto:vtardif@google.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Paul Kelly <paul@xmlteam.com<mailto:paul@xmlteam.com>> wrote:
>>>>> Also, how general do we need to be? Are we going to draw a distinction between team events, head-to-head sports (boxing, fencing) and race-type events (F1, athletics, swimming)? Or do we want a general formation for all three of those types of competition (to use the north american sense of that word :)
>>>>
>>>> This is the crux of the issue. To support events with more than two competitors, we will need more than a simple homeScore/awayScore model. With the Olympics coming up again, I think we should consider supporting these events sooner rather than later.
>>>>
>>>> - Vicki
>>>>
>>>> Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vtardif@google.com<mailto:vtardif@google.com>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk

>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
>> If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
>> Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
>> Further communication will signify your consent to this.
>> ---------------------