- From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:05:34 -0500
- To: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
- Cc: Yuliya Tikhokhod <tilid@yandex-team.ru>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, schema-org-team@googlegroups.com
> not meant to include VideoGameSeries - and Thad, is your +1 for using "part" > and "partOf" without a type for a video game series? > > Thanks, > Aaron Bradley, Electronic Arts Schema.org CAN have a type for VideoGameSeries, but maybe it is not necessary. I know some folks might like it or want it. But we should explore reuse of an existing type if we can. I hate bucket types that do not bring any additional value. And as Dan stated, we do not want to go there and have thrown that option out. The Freebase VideoGameSeries type is ALMOST a bucket type... but luckily it has 1 property of value that holds the collection of games in the series: games_in_series https://www.freebase.com/cvg/game_series?schema=&lang=en Finally, IMHO - Folks beginning to explore categories or types or "how should we model or do this with Schema.org ?" should really scan and search the Freebase Predicate listing before diving into what-if's, since a lot of work has already been done that closely aligns with Schema.org : https://www.googleapis.com/freebase/v1/search?indent=true&help=predicates -- -Thad +ThadGuidry Thad on LinkedIn
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2014 19:06:01 UTC