- From: Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 11:24:38 +0100
- To: public-talent-signal@w3.org
- Message-ID: <b2b12d7c-832c-63f1-3f2e-d8d1f2485e7c@pjjk.co.uk>
Thank you Merrilea. Everyone: any other comments or thoughts on how this <https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Comparison_of_JDX_JobSchema%2B_with_schema.org> might shape our work? My thinking at the moment is that: - Suggesting a property for the "number of positions open for this job posting" seems useful and should be another quick win. - There are requirements of several types: citizenship, physical, security, sensory. Might an approach of having a single jobRequirement property cover all of these adequately, or do they need to be distinguished from each other? - How important is Assessment to us? From the domain sketch it looks like a missing piece, and I know that is is considered to be a missing piece from the learning, education and training point of view as well. I would suggest that a class could be added with just a few properties that would be a start on filling this gap. Those would be my priorities. Several of the other issues <https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Issues,_use_cases_and_requirements> seem a bit more complex, for example, those that affect vocabularies that are used in Google job search have potential to break things. Any thoughts on these priorities? Phil On 13/08/2019 21:37, Merrilea Mayo wrote: > > The comparison is super helpful. Nice to have this in one place and > so easy to read. > > Merrilea > > On 8/13/2019 1:32 PM, Phil Barker wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> I have looked through the column comparing JDX JobSchema+ with what >> is in schema.org and refactored it slightly leading on what is and is >> not in schema.org, see Comparison of JDX JobSchema+ with schema.org >> <https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Comparison_of_JDX_JobSchema%2B_with_schema.org> >> [1] on the Talent Signal wiki. >> >> I have also added relevant items to our list of issues to be >> considered >> <https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Issues,_use_cases_and_requirements> >> [2]. >> >> All comments welcome, either feedback on JDX JobSchema+ or thoughts >> on the issues raised. >> >> Regards, Phil. >> >> 1. >> https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Comparison_of_JDX_JobSchema%2B_with_schema.org >> 2. >> https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Issues,_use_cases_and_requirements >> >> >> On 25/07/2019 15:50, Phil Barker wrote: >>> >>> Joshua, thank you very much for sharing this with the group. >>> >>> I know the amount of work that is going in to the JDX project [1] >>> and recognize that this represents a significant application of >>> schema.org (expanded through reference to HR Open and analysis of >>> use cases) for signaling information about hiring requirements. >>> >>> I would like to direct people's attention to the column in the main >>> table headed "comparison to schema.org". I propose that *this >>> information should factor highly in our prioritization of what >>> specific issues this group addresses***as it represents strong >>> feedback on where the existing terms in schema.org needed to be >>> refined or supplemented in order to meet talent signaling use cases. >>> This is not to say that I think we should just copy every change >>> indicated by this column, there will be some which are specific to >>> the JDX and out of scope for schema.org, and there may be cases >>> where input from this community improves on what JDX have done so far. >>> >>> If the group agrees, I will edit our existing list of issues and use >>> case requirements [2 >>> <https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Issues,_use_cases_and_requirements>] >>> to include the information from that column. >>> >>> So that this document and other relevant work from elsewhere doesn't >>> get buried in our email archive, I have added a page to the wiki on >>> existing and current relevant work [3 >>> <https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Existing_and_current_relevant_work>] >>> with a link. >>> >>> Best regards from a warm and sunny Scotland. >>> >>> Phil >>> >>> >>> 1. I'll remind you all here of my disclosure that I am receiving >>> funding from the US CCF for my work on this group and am also a >>> member of the JDX Data Working Group. >>> >>> 2. >>> https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Issues,_use_cases_and_requirements >>> >>> 3. >>> https://www.w3.org/community/talent-signal/wiki/Existing_and_current_relevant_work >>> >>> On 24/07/2019 19:57, Westfall, Joshua wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Talent Marketplace Signaling Group, >>>> >>>> The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation has enjoyed being a part of >>>> this community group and the great discussion around the JobPosting >>>> Schema. Therefore, in partnership with HR Open Standards, members >>>> of our Job Data Exchange (JDX) Advisory Committee >>>> <https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/jdx/advisory-board>, and ideas >>>> generated from this group we drafted a few property extensions and >>>> definitions to build off of the current JobPosting Schema (see the >>>> comparison column to the far right of the chart). We plan to pilot >>>> test these ideas that we are calling the “JDX JobSchema+” with 17 >>>> employer partners >>>> <https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/jdx/pilot-partners> over the >>>> next two months. The pilot test will conclude in October with an >>>> independent evaluation of the JDX JobSchema+ from both the >>>> demand-side (i.e., employers) and supply-side (i.e., education, >>>> training and credentialing providers, students and workers) of the >>>> talent pipeline. >>>> >>>> We look forward to sharing our findings with the TMS Community >>>> Group later this year. In the meantime, the JDX JobSchema+ proposal >>>> (attached) is open for public feedback on our JDX webpage >>>> <https://www.uschamberfoundation.org/jdx/job-schema> and depending >>>> on our findings and this group’s feedback, maybe a few of these >>>> properties can be considered for Schema.org. >>>> >>>> I look forward to hearing from you and please let me know if you >>>> have any questions or would like to discuss JDX pilot of the JDX >>>> JobSchema+ in more detail. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> *Joshua Westfall* >>>> >>>> Senior Manager, Policy & Programs >>>> >>>> U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation >>>> >>>> Center for Education and Workforce >>>> >>>> *O:*202.463.5843 >>>> >>>> *C:*202.845.3820 >>>> >>>> usccf-education-workforce web logo >>>> <http://www.uschamberfoundation.org/center-education-and-workforce> >>>> >>>> uschamberfoundation.org/CEW >>>> <http://www.uschamberfoundation.org/center-education-and-workforce> >>>> >>>> http://image.exct.net/lib/fef01278736102/m/1/USCCFB.gif >>>> <https://www.facebook.com/USCCFeducation>http://image.exct.net/lib/fef01278736102/m/1/USCCTwitter.gif >>>> <https://twitter.com/usccfeducation>linkedin >>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/u-s-chamber-of-commerce-foundation> >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil >>> CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk>: a cooperative consultancy for >>> innovation in education technology. >>> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance >>> learning; information systems for education. >>> >>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in >>> England number OC399090 >>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company, >>> number SC569282. >>> >> -- >> >> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil >> CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk>: a cooperative consultancy for >> innovation in education technology. >> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance >> learning; information systems for education. >> >> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in >> England number OC399090 >> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company, >> number SC569282. >> > -- > > Merrilea J. Mayo, Ph.D. > Mayo Enterprises, LLC > 12101 Sheets Farm Rd. > North Potomac, MD 20878 > > merrileamayo@gmail.com > https://merrileamayo.com/ < > > 240-304-0439 (cell) > 301-977-2599 (landline) > -- Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk>: a cooperative consultancy for innovation in education technology. PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning; information systems for education. CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in England number OC399090 PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company, number SC569282.
Received on Thursday, 15 August 2019 10:25:05 UTC