Re: Schema.org Sports Vocabulary Proposal

A concept that I don't see discussed explicitly is multi-team
organizations.  For US sports, this could include things like NBA D league,
AAA baseball, etc.  Something like USA Volleyball has men's & women's
national teams, B teams, Juniors teams, etc.  In Europe, some of the big
clubs are multi-sport covering football, volleyball, and even Formula 3.

This can probably be dealt with using SportsOrganization as long as teams
aren't restricted to belonging to only a single organization so that they
can belong to both their club organization and the league organization.

Tom


On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:17 PM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
> The teamSpecificRoles also seem a bit narrow, and people may play multiple
>> roles. Roles might better be modeled with something like a "Contribution"
>> class; we discussed this for the TV and Radio updates, although nothing
>> much came about from it. A person may contribute to a sports team using
>> multiple roles. This also allows modeling finer grained sports activities
>> such as a season, series, game, period, or individual play. The roles can
>> then be defined using an enumeration class similarly to sports disciplines.
>> Per-sport role properties are simpler, but also suffer from the cost of
>> adding them specifically to the vocabulary rather than allowing the use of
>> external enumerations.
>>
>
> This is also an issue in the latest draft of the Comics proposal that I'm
> working on; once we can base it on Periodicals, most of the remaining new
> properties are roles like artist, colorist, inker, letterer, penciler...
> but defining all of the potential contribution roles for every other
> potential domain seems like it is at best a duplicative effort of work that
> has been done elsewhere.I mentioned a potential approach back in September,
> and Niklas replied with an alternative (
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Sep/0190.html), but
> the discussion fizzled out at that point.
>
> Thinking about it further, having a Contributor type that extends Person
> by adding a "contributionType" property, which in turn points at an
> external enumeration (falling back to a literal value, of course) might
> suffice. For the sports context, SportsPlayer could then extend Contributor
> and add in the "hasStatistics" property so that that property doesn't have
> to be defined at the Person level.
>
> Perhaps it's worthwhile taking another kick at this? As Aaron Bradley has
> mentioned (https://plus.google.com/106943062990152739506/posts/VTdFR5R2PMs)
> if we go with external enumerations, providing some clear direction on
> which enumerations are acceptable will be important to implementers (I
> think the use of GoodRelations / ProductOntology for external enumerations
> set a nice example here). As for which external enumerations to use, I'm
> open to suggestions; the LC relators (
> http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators.html) offer a decent start, but
> while they hit some of the radio, TV, and movie roles, they're certainly
> not exhaustive; they don't cover all of the roles in the Comics realm; and
> they don't even touch the sports realm.
>