Re: VideoGame proposal

Thanks for the clarifications Dan and Thad.

I'm all in favor of using "part" and "partOf".

But I also need to have a way of describing a video game series.  The
example seems to provide this mechanism, but actually only affords me the
opportunity to do so in relationship to an actual video game.  If I declare
a website to be about "Mass Effect" how is a data consumer to know whether
that refers to a video game or  series?

Dan, can you give an example of one of those similar ways "we do things
with other creative works?"

> 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.

Yes, it can.  And I don't think we should shy away from creating a new type
when it's not appropriate to use an existing type, and I don't believe it's
appropriate here.  Which is why we don't describe a TV series an instance
of a TVEpisode - because an episode of a TV show is not a TV series,
anymore than a video game series is a video game.

The example Yuliya's provided illustrates this point splendidly.

The first entity declared with the name "Mass Effect" is not a VideoGame
but, a la Wikipedia [1] "a science fiction action role-playing third person
shooter video game series".

The second entity declared with the name "Mass Effect 1" does not exist.
But you will find "a 2007 science fiction action role-playing third person
shooter video game" with the name "Mass Effect." [2]  The fact that the
example had to make up a video game name speaks to the most common of use
cases concerning video games and video game series:

> Using isPartOf and hasPart covers
a lot of ground and gets something out there - we can always add more
terms later.

With respect I don't think "getting something out there" should be the goal
of addressing what Martin has noted is "one of the most frequently
requested class [sic] in www.productontology.org." [3] If we make
modifications to handle the well-known entity that is a video game series,
then there's going to be a heap of deprecated code generated in the interim.

>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

Precisely what I propose, based in large part on how Freebase models the
video game universe. Sometimes one needs a specific type for a specific
situation, even if it is a on-off: IMO this is one of these situations.

> We should also add an example showing how to associate a VideoGame
with a http://schema.org/VideoObject using 'about'

It just so happens I have this on hand for http://schema.org/Article (uses
the non-existent property videoGameSeries:) - see below.

Reminds to ask again if anyone has any feedback on my proposal that
http://schema.org/trailer be extended to include the type VideoGame?

<!-- JSON-LD -->
<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "http://schema.org",
  "@type": "Article",
  "about": {
    "@type": "VideoGame",
    "name": "Battlefield 4",
"videoGameSeries": "Battlefield",
    "gamePlatform": "Xbox One"
  },
  "interactionCount": [
    "UserLikes:25",
"UserTweets:20",
"UserPlusOnes:15"
  ]
}

Thanks!   Aaron

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_Effect
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_Effect_(video_game)
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014May/0159.html


On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:

> > 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
>