W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > June 2014

Re: Series

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 06:03:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CABuiOSq3_xMgZ0pjxFKG0=jMxvCeR4moGKtBT-hc6H_vcdZEdw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
Cc: "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On Friday, June 13, 2014, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org> wrote:

>  A couple of recent threads have highlighted the current very
> TV/Radio-ness of the Series <http://schema.org/Series> Type.  Hardly
> surprising considering the proposal it came from.
>  It seems that it would be better if Series became a generic Type with
> more focussed sub-types such as TVSeries, RadioSeries, GameSeries,
> MovieSeries, LiterarySeries, etc.
>  Looking at the current TV/Radio Series structure, this might be best
> handled by the introduction of a BroadcastSeries Type to serve the current
> purpose of Series, which then would be replaced by a more generic Series
> Type definition:
>   CreativeWork>Series>BroadcastSeries>TVSeries
>  CreativeWork>Series>BroadcastSeries>RadioSeries
>  CreativeWork>Series>LiterarySeries
> CreativeWork>Series>MovieSeries
> CreativeWork>Series>>GameSeries
> etc.
I've long advocated this kind of abstraction. Taking it a step further, a
Baseball Series is very similar, but, of course, is not a CreativeWork.
These could also be considered Events, with an individual a Episode a

There are other things that start out as CreativeWork classes, but become
more abstract; an ItemList probably shouldn't be a kind of CreativeWork,
IMO. Perhaps these are Intangeble?


>  ~Richard
Received on Friday, 13 June 2014 13:03:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:32 UTC