New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Distinguish between ceterms:contactType and ceterms:contactOption #486

Closed
siuc-nate opened this Issue Oct 31, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@siuc-nate

siuc-nate commented Oct 31, 2017

The original definitions/comments/etc. for these two properties:
#287 (contactType)
#305 (contactOption)

are quite different from what they are now:
http://credreg.net/ctdl/terms/contactType#contactType
http://credreg.net/ctdl/terms/contactOption#contactOption

And now, I would be hard-pressed to explain a sufficient difference between:
"Option for a toll-free number or support for hearing-impaired callers."
and
"Text identifying the type of service provided by an organizational contact. A person or organization may have different contact points for different services. The contact type property provides for adding text to identity the service; e.g., "toll-free number" or "support for hearing-impaired callers"."

The fact that both reference the same example (support for hearing-impaired callers) doesn't help much. I suspect that these two properties may have been mixed up at some point. I think they should be revised to more closely reflect their original definitions. Something like:

contactType: "A brief, descriptive name of the type of Contact Point. Examples may include "Registration", "Transcripts", "Verifications", and "Financial Assistance"."
contactOption: "A brief, descriptive name of an aspect of the Contact Point. Examples may include "Toll-free" and "TTY".

Alternatively, since:

  1. contactOption's values could arguably be merged into contactTypes (e.g., "toll-free helpdesk" or "registration (TTY)"), and
  2. you would need one ContactPoint for each combination anyway ("registration" and "registration (TTY)" would be two separate ContactPoints regardless), and
  3. contactOption seems to only be relevant to phone numbers (I could be convinced otherwise):

It may be better to deprecate contactOption and revise the definition of contactType to something like:

contactType: "A brief, descriptive name of the type of Contact Point. Examples may include "Registrations", "Transcripts", "Toll-Free Helpdesk", and "Financial Assistance (TTY)".

Thoughts?

@stuartasutton

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@stuartasutton

stuartasutton Nov 1, 2017

Contributor

I agree, that contactOption is best deprecated. It's use is confusing even in schema.org.

Contributor

stuartasutton commented Nov 1, 2017

I agree, that contactOption is best deprecated. It's use is confusing even in schema.org.

@siuc-nate

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@siuc-nate

siuc-nate Jun 26, 2018

Actions to be taken:

  • Deprecate ceterms:contactOption
  • Remove the domain and range from ceterms:contactOption
  • Add meta:supersededBy to ceterms:contactOption pointing to ceterms:contactType

siuc-nate commented Jun 26, 2018

Actions to be taken:

  • Deprecate ceterms:contactOption
  • Remove the domain and range from ceterms:contactOption
  • Add meta:supersededBy to ceterms:contactOption pointing to ceterms:contactType
@siuc-nate

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@siuc-nate

siuc-nate Jul 12, 2018

This has been taken care of in the schema management system and noted in the history tracking.

siuc-nate commented Jul 12, 2018

This has been taken care of in the schema management system and noted in the history tracking.

@siuc-nate siuc-nate closed this Jul 12, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment