- From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 00:17:46 +0200
- To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
No objections from the GoodRelations side ;-)
Note that in GoodRelations, the equivalent class is named ProductOrService:
http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#ProductOrService
I would not recommend to create a distinct class "Service", because many sites cannot properly distinguish products from (commodity) services, so they cannot make the distinction in the markup.
For instance, many shop applications mix products and associated services in their database and cannot reliably keep them apart. This is why GoodRelations has a common superclass as the default.
Martin
On Sep 11, 2013, at 11:19 PM, Thad Guidry wrote:
> +1 you have my positive response...
>
> I still would like to see the term "intangible" thrown into the Product definition however.
>
> """
> Any offered product or service--(tangible or intangible) for example: a pair of shoes; a concert
> ticket; a rental car; a haircut; or an episode of a TV show streamed
> online.
> """
>
> --
> -Thad
> Thad on Freebase.com
> Thad on LinkedIn
--------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype: mfhepp
twitter: mfhepp
Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
=================================================================
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 22:18:11 UTC