Re: CreativeWork can't be a Product?

Dan's solution and Martin's link are excellent ones.  Just a quick FYI a
previous discussion and a proposal related to it provide some further
information on this type of conundrum in schema.org:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemabibex/2013Jan/0182.html
http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SchemaDotOrgMetaSchema

A fragment from the former reference:

> Assuming they take OWL seriously, they would infer new types for the
> entity if properties were mixed and matched. If example, if the claimed
> type is schema:Book and somebody used the schema:sku property, they
> could infer it is also a schema:Product.




On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:16:01PM +0100, Chilly Bang wrote:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> i'm busy at the moment with marking up with microdata of an online
>> bookstore and realized the following dilemma:
>> if a page is about describing and selling of a CreativeWork/Book, so i
>> come to selling properties with itemprop="offers" itemscope="" itemtype="
>> http://schema.org/**Offer <http://schema.org/Offer>". But on this way i
>> can't describe the book i sell like Product, with product's properties - i
>> can't find any passage from CreativeWork to Product. There is in fact a
>> passage from Offer to Product, with itemprop="itemOffered" itemscope=""
>> itemtype="http://schema.org/**Product <http://schema.org/Product>", but
>> repeating isn't a good way, beside of this it isn't easy to get such
>> passage into html, even with itemref.
>>
>> I see no possibility to go the way CreativeWork->Product->Offer (or
>> CreativeWork->Product and CreativeWork->Offer), but only
>> CreativeWork->Offer, or Product->Offer. CreativeWork can't be a Product or
>> am i wrong?
>>
>> Imho CreativeWork surely can own product's properties so it must gladly
>> have a passage from any CreativeWork property to Product.
>>
>
> You can just use both types in the itemtype declaration, for example,
> itemtype="Book Product".
>
> We're doing this in the #schemabibex group to express offers for a given
> item. And Martin gave a wonderful example of this approach on this list
> just a few days back at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-vocabs/2013Sep/**0206.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Sep/0206.html>
>
>