Re: [TalentSignal] proposal for Job Start Date

On 07/05/2019 14:38, Joseph D. Marsh wrote:
>
> I think the point of this exercise is to create/promote **some** 
> structure, where there is none today.
>
> As it stands, we’re going with “send whatever you want … we hope it’s 
> a date(like) value … and if you are simply looking for someone to 
> start as soon as possible, there’s a flag for that”.
>
I think it is a little more directive than that: more like "provide a 
date, if that's not sufficient use text (as well or instead), and if you 
are simply looking for someone to start as soon as possible, there’s a 
flag for that"

We can add example markup to show Date+Text

Phil

> Thanks,
>
> - Joseph
>
> *From:* Martin Solli <martin@vilect.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 7, 2019 9:35 AM
> *To:* Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
> *Cc:* Joseph D. Marsh <jmarsh@3storysoftware.com>; 
> public-talent-signal@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: [TalentSignal] proposal for Job Start Date
>
> Yes, allowing Text in addition to ISO 8601 Date should cover what 
> we’re seeing in job postings in the wild.
>
> I’m unsure about the usefulness of the “jobImmediateStart” field. It 
> covers a use case like “I need a job right now, let’s see what’s 
> available for me to start working immediately”, but is this use case 
> so central and special that it justifies its own boolean field (with 
> the problems they bring)? I don’t know. I guess people could just 
> leave out the property in their job postings if they need more nuance.
>
> Martin Solli
> Developer & Co-Founder, Vilect
> https://www.vilect.com/
>
>     On 7 May 2019, at 11:35, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk
>     <mailto:phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks Martin,
>
>     *All: *any objection if we follow Martin and Vicki's advice and
>     add Text back into the expected range for jobStartDate? It's
>     largely an acknowledgement of what people will do anyway if they
>     cannot express the information that they want as a date.
>
>     *Martin*, is this enough to address your concerns?
>
>         *jobStartDate*
>
>         *Definition*: The date on which a successful applicant for
>         this job would be expected to start work. Choose a specific
>         date in the future or use the jobImmediateStart property to
>         indicate the position is to be filled as soon as possible.
>
>         *Expected type*: ISO 8601 Date <https://schema.org/Date> ,
>         Text <https://schema.org/Text>
>
>         *jobImmediateStart*
>
>         *Defintion*: An indicator as to whether a position is
>         available for an immediate start.
>
>         *Expected type*: Boolean <https://schema.org/Boolean>
>
>     Some examples would be useful for clarifying / setting guidance
>     for difficult cases. Let me know if you have any text that might
>     be the basis for such examples.
>
>     Phil
>
>     On 07/05/2019 09:29, Martin Solli wrote:
>
>         I think HR hiring managers appreciate the nuance between
>         “negotiable” and “as soon as possible”, and would very much
>         like to express this in a free-form text field when posting a
>         job. It is not hard to find examples of job postings that
>         would not be well-served under the current proposal.
>
>                 - 14% have some variation of “As soon as possible” in
>                 the local language.
>
>             We say to use jobImmediateStart for this
>
>         It is not the same. Again, it’s nuance. “Immediate” according
>         to dictionaries mean “without delay or very soon", while “as
>         soon as possible” is more vague. It invites questions like “…
>         as possible for whom?” Other languages might have other words
>         that suggest different things to local readers. There might
>         not be a one to one relationship between “immediate” and any
>         one word in a given language.
>
>                 - 5% have only the name of a month or two consecutive
>                 months (“August/September”).
>
>             ISO 8601 allows values like these, e.g. 2019-06 and
>             2019-08-01/2019-09-30
>
>         It does, but to a human reader in Norway “August/September”
>         means something like “after the sommer holiday sometime,
>         there’s no rush, but we need to fill this position before
>         autumn really kicks in”.
>
>         If the job requires a specific start date it can be expressed
>         with an ISO 8601 date. Software can trivially parse the string
>         - if it’s a well-formed ISO 8601 string, the software can use
>         this structured date, otherwise it is a string that humans (or
>         more sophisticated algorithms, perhaps backed by machine
>         learning) can read and understand.
>
>         I think Vicki Tardif said it best earlier in the thread:
>
>
>
>             If we don't allow for Text, people will do it anyway with
>             no guidance, particularly on the open web. As an example,
>             there are many cases where properties expecting a Person
>             instead get a string like "Jane Doe". It is up to the
>             reader to determine whether this is useful or not and act
>             accordingly. If schema.org <http://schema.org/> over
>             prescribes behavior, folks will just go off and do their
>             own thing.
>
>         I can testify that this is what people do in our system, even
>         when steered towards providing a specific date or a value like
>         “ASAP”.
>
>         Martin Solli
>         Developer & Co-Founder, Vilect
>         https://www.vilect.com/
>
>     -- 
>
>     Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>.
>     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.