- From: <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 15:30:53 +0200
- To: Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com>
- Cc: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
I would bundle all respective additions under a new type - e.g. schema:Occupation or schema:Job, likely as a subtype of schema:Action (or schema:Thing?). Jobs are roles that individuals hold over certain periods of time. So let us not put job-related properties directly under schema:Person. The terms and conditions and the compensation should be modeled via schema:Demand (for Job offers - someone seeking work to get done for money) and schema:Offer (for Job search / applications - someone offering labor for money) and its existing commercial properties. So we would have a) Job Search schema:Person -> schema:makesOffer -> schema:Offer -> schema:itemOffered -> schema:Occupation b) Job Offer schema:Organization -> schema:seeks -> schema:Demand -> schema:itemOffered -> schema:Occupation Instead of schema:itemOffered, schema:includesObject may be more appropriate, but adds one level of indirection. Martin ------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: martin.hepp@unibw.de phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ On 16 Sep 2014, at 22:04, Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com> wrote: > During Vicki Tardif Holland's post about Financial information for Person and Organization (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Sep/0115.html) once again the subject of adding a Job and/or Profession type to schema.org has come to the table. > > Maybe therefore it's time to start thinking about this out loud. > > A Job type would probably have a lot of properties in common with the already existing JobPosting, but which ones exactly will still have to be figured out. > > There are a couple of things I know people are looking for the Person type, which sort of overlap with this. For Person some would like to have: > skill > Skill (eg. a list of Skills) > qualification > Qualification (eg. a list of Qualification) > > as opposed to JobPosting's 'skills' and 'qualifications', which are plural forms with Text as their expected value. > > So the question here also is, should Person be expanded with: > baseSalary, > salaryCurrency, > skill > Skill or just skills > qualifications > Qualification or just qualifications > and any other property that seems to be fitting, looking at JobPosting. > > Or should we only focus on schema.org/Job/Profession for now and continue the discussion about Person after that? > > Anyways, any thoughts are appreciated, (I'm just trying to get the subject raised here). > >
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2014 13:31:13 UTC