RE: Person and fictional Re: VideoGame proposal

It seems like there must be SOME degree of fiction inherent to schema:about already. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant


Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@google.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 7:43 AM
> To: Wallis,Richard
> Cc: martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org; Charles McCathie Nevile; Thad
> Guidry; Karen Coyle; <public-vocabs@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Person and fictional Re: VideoGame proposal
> 
> On 20 October 2014 10:56, Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
> wrote:
> > +1.
> >
> > Is it time to resurrect my FictionalThing Type proposal?
> >        http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/FictionalThing

> >
> > It was an attempt to introduce a simple way, through multi-typing, to
> > identify any Thing that could be fictional.  These discussions often
> > centre around people/characters, but fictional-ness spreads way
> beyond
> > people to organisations, countries, planets, languages and lumps of
> > rock.  It included a property to reference a [real] Thing that the
> fictional is a representation of.
> 
> Could it make more sense to make this relational - fictionallyAbout or
> similar - so that the relevant CreativeWork is included in the
> description. This might make it easier to handle fictitious accounts of
> real world entities. --Dan

Received on Monday, 20 October 2014 14:32:11 UTC