Re: Schema.org proposal: Financial information

> The latter, so it is less about varying by country and more about varying
by market, which goes to your next point.

> I would be happy to add an intermediary type to capture market and ticker
symbol on that market.

As this now puts corporate stock and trading information on the table, I'd
just like to note that Google Finance has already extended schema.org with
a new class - "FinancialQuote" - using several existing properties, and
adding some others.

IMO what Google Finance has developed is very serviceable, and as such I
think it would be good to attempt reconciling further financial development
work with this extension.

>From today's stock quote for GOOG on Google Finance (some values removed
for clarity):

<div id="sharebox-data" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="
http://schema.org/Intangible/FinancialQuote">
  <meta itemprop="name" content="Google Inc" />
  <meta itemprop="url" content="https://www.google.ca/finance?cid=694653" />
  <meta itemprop="imageUrl" content="[URL]" />
  <meta itemprop="tickerSymbol" content="GOOG" />
  <meta itemprop="exchange" content="NASDAQ" />
  <meta itemprop="exchangeTimezone" content="America/New_York" />
  <meta itemprop="price" content="580.65" />
  <meta itemprop="priceChange" content="+7.55" />
  <meta itemprop="priceChangePercent" content="1.32" />
  <meta itemprop="quoteTime" content="2014-09-16T15:48:55Z" />
  <meta itemprop="dataSource" content="NASDAQ real-time data" />
  <meta itemprop="dataSourceDisclaimerUrl"content="[URL]" />
  <meta itemprop="priceCurrency" content="USD" />
</div>

Note too that Google Finance's use of tickerSymbol follows neither the
recommend syntax nor the recommended vocabulary for tickerSymbol as
currently described on schema.org.  Google's Finance's method much better
reflects actual practice by publishers.  The explicit separation of symbol
and exchange by making them different properties is less ambiguous (and, in
any case, most publishers use a colon rather than space character to
separate the two).  The recommendation to use ISO15022 MI Codes is of
course aimed at avoiding the declaration of ambiguous stock ticker values,
but in practice I've seen no publisher utilize them - neither at the
presentation level (where they would be unintelligible to human consumers)
nor in the data layer (I've surveyed usage fairly extensively in the past,
but have never seen an MIC value encoded - even among major news
publishers).

http://schema.org/tickerSymbol
"The exchange traded instrument associated with a Corporation object. The
tickerSymbol is expressed as an exchange and an instrument name separated
by a space character. For the exchange component of the tickerSymbol
attribute, we reccommend [sic] using the controlled vocaulary [sic] of
Market Identifier Codes (MIC) specified in ISO15022."


On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:37 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <
perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:

> On 09/16/2014 09:11 PM, Jarno van Driel wrote:
> >     "Fair enough. I would rather not try to create a profession taxonomy
> >     in schema.org <http://schema.org/>, so I would add a "Profession"
> >     type which could have any text name."
> >
> >
> > So then we might get something like:
> > Person > profession > Profession
> >
> > where Profession has the following properties like:
> > name, description, url, baseSalary, salaryCurrency
>
> Person can work multiple Jobs within the same Profession
>
> eg. Doctor can work in multiple Clinics
>
>
>
>
>
>