Re: Contact Point is broken

• From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
• Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 23:03:32 +0200
• To: kurt@bollacker.com
• Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
• Message-ID: <CAFNgM+bDj1xa9MEo5NP5UPa=u+0mLQ5iz4L6VXxxTYKUYnnU7A@mail.gmail.com>

On 11 October 2011 20:53, Kurt Bollacker <kurt@bollacker.com> wrote:
> Looking at the v0.9 draft schema, Contact Point is given as a subtype
> of Structured Value, yet it is described as "A contact point—for
> example, a Customer Complaints department."  I can't see how a
> customer complaints department can be intrinsically an instance of
> Structured Value.  Also, Contact Point has the awkward property
> "contactType", with examples of "person" and "organization".  Thinking
> of a Contact Point as intrinsically a person or organization makes
> much more sense.
>
> Furthermore, the type Postal Address is given as a subtype of Contact
> Point.  A physical address is a very different thing than a customer
> complaints department (which might even be internet based, without a
> postal address). So I think Contact Point is broken.

I've raised this as http://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/3
(but left it a bit more general, as I think there are a few other
observations on ContactPoint that can be recorded there, and I don't
want to drown the list in new issues!).

cheers,

Dan

Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2011 21:04:10 UTC