Re: Proposal: schema.org/MobileVideoGame

Can you elaborate on what makes the distinction useful?
The way I think about it is that you're trying to take one attribute of a
game (based on the platform) and promoting it as a type.
Would it be equally valid to have types like:
  OnlineGame
  MultiplayerGame
  PuzzleGame

I also think that mobile game is a pretty loose concept.
Wikipedia includes calculators and portable consoles like NIntendo 3ds and
Ps Vita as part of the mobile game category:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_game

I'd personally think of mobile game as being games that run on a phone or
tablet - specifically on: Android, iOS, BlackBerry, Windows Phone and
possibly web-based games that are optimized for phone/tablet.





On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote:

> "... webmaster has a site about video games.  Everything is marked up as a
> video game.  Games have platforms that might be indicative that the game is
> a "mobile", but I'm not sure that the distinction is interesting for them."
>
> I assure you that distinction is very interesting for them indeed. :)
>
> Or to generalize the question by reference to the types' parents, "from a
> webmaster's perspective -- why would they care about distinguishing between
> MobileApplication and SoftwareApplication?"
>
> "As someone that consumes the data -- can't we just map from the platform
> (or set of platforms) to determine whether our application considers
> something to be mobile or not?"
>
> If the platforms (or set of platforms) are declared I guess you could, but
> if not I guess you couldn't.  Relying on item properties to make those sort
> of inferences is by no means universal, so I don't know why data consumers
> should have to engage in that sort of reasoning to determine whether a game
> is a mobile game or not - again, it makes sense to me that
> MobileApplication exists, rather than forcing data consumers to map the
> operating system to determine whether the application considers a program
> to me an "app" or not.  Or do you think that's reasonable?  If not, why is
> it reasonable for a game?
>
> On a side note it's by means clear whether "iOS" is a
> schema.org/gamePlatform or schema.org/operatingSystem, since the former
> is valid for VideoGame, and the latter for VideoGame's parent type
> SoftwareApplication.
>
> And on a (what I think is interesting:) side side note, Google Play
> doesn't use "operatingSystem" at all, but rather "operatingSystems".  Which
> makes total sense in the context of the schema.org description for
> "operatingSystem" ("Operating systems supported (Windows 7, OSX 10.6,
> Android 1.6).") as software applications are rarely operating system
> *version* specific.  While of course it'd be trivial to reconcile
> "system" and "systems" (and schema.org has many deprecated plurals, like
> "performers") the plural does give an explicit nod to the fact that
> applications generally run on OS version *families*.
>
> E.g.: [1]
>
> <div class="content" itemprop="operatingSystems">2.3.3 and up</div>
>
> [1]
> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ea.game.simpsons4_na&hl=en
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Jerome Mourits <jmourits@google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> So i guess from a webmaster's perspective -- why would they care about
>> distinguishing between MobileVideoGame and VideoGame?
>>
>> I could see a couple scenarios:
>> 1) webmaster has a site about mobile apps.  Everything is marked up as a
>> MobileApplication.  Games are co-typed as a VideoGame in order to add
>> information about number of players etc.
>> 2) webmaster has a site about video games.  Everything is marked up as a
>> video game.  Games have platforms that might be indicative that the game is
>> a "mobile", but I'm not sure that the distinction is interesting for them.
>>
>> As someone that consumes the data -- can't we just map from the platform
>> (or set of platforms) to determine whether our application considers
>> something to be mobile or not?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> *Would we consider the game to be a MobileApplication?*
>>>
>>> I think that depends on the context in which the thing and its
>>> properties are being declared, and the approach to modelling the data.
>>>
>>> IMO this is exactly analogous to a program that's available for desktop
>>> and mobile operating systems, like Adobe Reader.
>>>
>>> (1) "Adobe Reader" Mobile:
>>> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.adobe.reader&hl=en
>>> (2) "Adobe Reader" Desktop:  http://get.adobe.com/reader/
>>> (3) "Adobe Reader" Mobile and Desktop:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Acrobat
>>>
>>> Obviously (1) would be marked up as a MobileApplication and (2) as a
>>> SoftwareApplication, but what about (3)?
>>>
>>> I'd probably say SoftwareApplication, in the same way I'd declare a shop
>>> that did both auto and motorcycle repairs as AutomotiveBusiness - the
>>> broader class - rather than the more specific subclass MotorcycleRepair.
>>>
>>> But, for the game, if I required a MobileApplication property, I guess
>>> I'd use, yes, an MTE. :)  (There is a question of whether or the game is
>>> substantially the same on the different platforms - that is whether or not
>>> "Hearthstone" for Windows is actually the *same *game as "Hearthstone"
>>> for iOS, or whether they're different games that share the same name, just
>>> as Reader for Android is substantially different for Reader for Windows
>>> even though still called "Adobe Reader" in both cases.  But I'm basically
>>> approaching the task as "how would I markup the Wikipedia page" in both
>>> cases.)
>>>
>>> The conundrum is, though, unaffected by the availability or
>>> non-availability of MobileGame as a type.  Currently, the question is
>>> "would we consider the game to be a VideoGame or MobileApplication?"; with
>>> the more specific type the challenge is the same:  "would we consider the
>>> game to be a VideoGame or a MobileVideoGame", just as the availability of a
>>> more specific mobile type for software applications still leaves us with
>>> the question "would we consider Acrobat Reader to be a SoftwareApplication
>>> or a MobileApplication?"
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Jerome Mourits <jmourits@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What about games that are available both for console / pc as well as
>>>> mobile?
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearthstone:_Heroes_of_Warcraft
>>>>
>>>> This game was initially released for Windows, OS X and the later was
>>>> released for iOs and Android.
>>>>
>>>> Would we consider the game to be a MobileApplication?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Vicki Tardif Holland <
>>>> vtardif@google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Out of curiosity, what limitations do you see in having to use
>>>>> multiple types?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Vicki
>>>>>
>>>>> Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vtardif@google.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> schema.org v1.92 introduced the new type VideoGame, a more specific
>>>>>> type of both (the also-introduced) Game, and of SoftwareApplication.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> VideoGame is a great addition, but as mobile video games stand poised
>>>>>> to overtake console-based games in popularity [1], there is no way
>>>>>> differentiate between a traditional video game and this important variant.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Freebase [2], Wikipedia [3] and Wikidata [4] all have entries for
>>>>>> "mobile game", and the Google distinguishes between "Video game" [5] and
>>>>>> "Mobile game" [6] in Knowledge Graph results generated on the basis of a
>>>>>> video game title search.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps most tellingly, schema.org itself gives a nod to the
>>>>>> importance of mobile video games by providing a a markup example on the
>>>>>> schema.org/VideoGame page.  And in my opinion the way in which this
>>>>>> example is necessarily formulated demonstrates the utility of a
>>>>>> MobileVideoGame type:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <script type="application/ld+json">
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>   "@context": "http://schema.org",
>>>>>>   "@type": ["VideoGame","MobileApplication"],
>>>>>>   "gamePlatform":"iOS",
>>>>>>   [...]
>>>>>> }</script>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only by means of this multi-type entity declaration is a data
>>>>>> consumer able to determine that a given video game is a mobile video game,
>>>>>> and then only by inference - for those data consumers that are able to
>>>>>> correctly process multi-type entities properly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In light of all of this, I propose MobileVideoGame, a more specific
>>>>>> type of both VideoGame and MobileApplication.  No additional properties
>>>>>> would be required to support this new type.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aaron Bradley
>>>>>> Electronic Arts
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://fortune.com/2015/01/15/mobile-console-game-revenues-2015/
>>>>>> [2] http://www.freebase.com/m/04951x
>>>>>> [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_game
>>>>>> [4] http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1121542
>>>>>> [5]
>>>>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=battlefield%204&pws=0&hl=en&num=10
>>>>>> [6]
>>>>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=simpsons%20tapped%20out&pws=0&hl=en&num=10
>>>>>> [7]
>>>>>> https://developers.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/?url=http://jsbin.com/niqile
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>