- From: Paul Wilton <paul.wilton@ontoba.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 14:57:31 +0000
- To: public-vocabs@w3.org
Hi I have been working recently at the Press Association with the Sport ontology, modelling the Olympics , Football and Horse Racing. I have been following the proposed sports vocabulary extensions for Schema.org, and have a question around these constructs : Thing > Person > SportsAthlete Thing > Person > SportsAthlete/Baseball Thing > Person > SportsAthlete/Football I guess I am not 100% comfortable with the idea of sub-classing a Person as an Athlete - I dont really see an Athlete as a more specialised form of a Person, but rather than a Role or Vocation that a Person takes in life. Just because we tend to think of many roles/vocations as being people oriented (Doctor, Engineer), in many cases they are not. For example in this case ESPN list "Secreteriat" , a race horse, in their top 50 Atheletes of the century (number 36) : http://espn.go.com/sportscentury/athletes.html Thus, if ESPN marked up their list against this vocabulary, we would be inferring that Secreteriat is a Person. So I am keen to understand the reasoning behind this approach , or of this could possibly be changed such that Roles (temporal) /or Vocations (possibly not temporal) are separate Things that are applied via some other relationship to a Person (or a Horse or a Robot for that matter) kind regards, Paul Wilton
Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 14:59:29 UTC