Re: result of an Action

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Sam Goto <goto@google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:37 AM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <
> perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I noticed updates to RsvpAction in sdo-venkman announcement:
>> http://sdo-venkman.appspot.com/RsvpAction
>>
>> Earlier I suggested reconsidering what information we reference directly
>> from Action and what from it's result:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Oct/0137.html
>>
>> Currently we can find couple of IMO clear examples where an Action
>> yields certain result:
>>
>> Action                 result
>>
>> PhotographAction       Photograph
>> WriteAction            Article
>> FilmAction             Movie
>> PaintAction            Painting
>> ReviewAction           Review
>> CommentAction          Comment
>>
>> In case of RsvpAction, we add two properties directly rsvpResponse and
>> additionalNumberOfGuests. At the same time leaving Reservation and
>> Ticket not related to RsvpAction in any way. Maybe we could use
>> Reservation as a result of RsvpAction?
>
>
> I think these (i.e. having RsvpAction.rsvpResponse and
> RsvpAction.additionalNumberOfGuests VERSUS RsvpAction.result = Reservation)
> are not mutually exclusive, but rather they are equally valid.
>
> I'm thinking of rsvpResponse and additionalNumberOfGuests as "adverbs",
> that is, modifiers of the manner in which you are rsvp-ing. Hence, why they
> started as a property of RsvpAction.
>
> Similarly, you could also possibly/optionally have a Reservation to be
> created as a result of RsvpAction, which you would use RsvpAction.result
> for.
>
> I don't think Rsvp-ing necessarily implies the creation of a Reservation
> or a Ticket.
>
> Am I making sense?
>
>
>> Can we maybe write an example of
>> scenario where RSVP YES to an event requires getting a ticket? We also
>> introduce in latest update expectsAcceptanceOf which could help here.
>>
>> CommentAction gives another example where I see current design rather
>> unclear. Currently included example:
>>
>> {
>>   "@context": "http://schema.org",
>>   "@type": "CommentAction",
>>   "agent": {
>>     "@type": "Person",
>>     "name": "John"
>>   },
>>   "object": {
>>     "@type": "UserComment",
>>     "name": "That's cool!"
>>   },
>>   "about": {
>>     "@type": "ScholarlyArticle",
>>     "name": "We found that P = NP!"
>>   }
>> }
>>
>> I would write instead:
>>
>> {
>>   "@context": "http://schema.org",
>>   "@type": "CommentAction",
>>   "@id": "http://example.org/people/jogn/log/12342342",
>>   "agent": {
>>     "@type": "Person",
>>     "@id": "http://example.org/people/john",
>>     "name": "John"
>>   },
>>   "object": {
>>     "@type": "ScholarlyArticle",
>>     "@id": "http://example.org/articles/p-equal-np",
>>     "name": "We found that P = NP!"
>>   },
>>   "result": {
>>     "@type": "Comment",
>>     "@id": "http://example.org/articles/p-equal-np/comments/1"
>>     "about": "http://example.org/articles/p-equal-np",
>>     "author": "http://example.org/people/john",
>>     "text": "That's cool!"
>>   }
>> }
>>
>
> Yep, I agree with you.
>
> Your example is a better representation than what we have.
>
> Git pull request?
>
> On a related note, deprecreating the entire UserInteraction sub-tree was
> in one of the early proposals for Actions but I think it got lost somehow.
>

FYI, I filled this as a issue for tracking purposes:

https://github.com/rvguha/schemaorg/issues/172


>
>
>>
>> This way an Article can simply include comments (which can also link to
>> the action they result from):
>>
>> {
>>   "@context": "http://schema.org",
>>   "@type": "ScholarlyArticle",
>>   "@id": "http://example.org/articles/p-equal-np",
>>   "name": "We found that P = NP!"
>>   },
>>   "comment": [
>>     {
>>       "@type": "Comment",
>>       "@id": "http://example.org/articles/p-equal-np/comments/1"
>>       "about": "http://example.org/articles/p-equal-np",
>>       "author": "http://example.org/people/john",
>>       "text": "That's cool!",
>>       "@reverse": {
>>         "result": "http://example.org/people/jogn/log/12342342"
>>       }
>>     }
>>   ]
>> }
>>
>> I also notice that in many cases agent in an Action becomes author in
>> this action's result, similar object in an action becomes about in result.
>>
>> Once we clarify general convention on using results of Actions, I could
>> help with writing more concrete examples which would provide clear
>> reference.
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>>
>