Add a projects section

[lostphilosopher]

This might be redundant with hobbies? If that is the case I'd argue that hobbies should be renamed to projects. It makes a stronger impression.

Proposed projects section would be a place to add work done outside the "work" (paid) context. For example, assuming JSON Resume isn't something being made for an employer, it doesn't have a clear place in the current format.

Potential properties:
projectName
startDate
endDate
url
description

[wdoekes]

I'd argue against removing hobbies. "Fishing" is a hobby, not a project. I can envision scenario's where employers use the hobbies in their selection.

As for projects, I'm afraid it might be too tech-specific. For non-technies, it'd be more common to fill out volunteer work (chairman of local football club). Would that fit under work? Or can we think of something where that fits, along with your suggested projects?

[lostphilosopher]

Thank you for the feedback! I like keeping hobbies, and adding both projects and volunteer work.

BUT, I agree that if that a more broadly applicable term would be a great option. (I just don't happen to have one handy...)

It may be too tech specific. However, a completely non-technical person could maintain a wordpress blog and count that as a project (or a publication but that to me implies peer reviewed), they could be writing a book that hasn't yet been published, they could also be working on creating a schema standard for resumes, etc. It also seems easier for non-tech people to omit projects on their resumes, than for tech people to shoe horn them in to a format that doesn't explicitly include them.

Could volunteer work be included under projects? Or is it important that it be grouped apart?

I've written resumes where I grouped experience into "Related Experience" and "Additional Experience" and then just dispersed work, volunteering, and projects as they applied.

[lstroud]

There could be many projects within a job. Projects could also exist outside of jobs. Projects would likely have keywords in addition to a textual description.

[lostphilosopher]

@lstroud, I'll second both of those ideas. (As long is there is a non-jobs place to talk about projects.)

[vote539]

There could be a projects field at the top level, as well as in each work item. This way if you have projects in-work as well as out-of-work, you can list both. Templating engines can decide whether to list the projects together or separately.

[wfalkwallace]

Projects could also be activities or experience (or some combination like "activities and projects" to form a broader field encompassing volunteer work, side projects, and even hobbies, all of which tend to have urls (if only for pictures for hobbies like woodwork or fishing) as well as dates, and descriptions. This may throw some vagueness into the schema, but seems more intuitive to me.

[osg]

I quite like distinguishing between hobbies and projects. As previously mentioned, we are all partaking in an open-source project. How do we list it? Let's dogfood it.

Also, to my ears, hobbies sounds old fashioned; interests sounds more current to me.

[DonDebonair]

My take on this:

• Have both hobbies and projects as separate sections (at root level). projects is great for things like our contributions to jsonresume, hobbies is great for telling the world that I love tending my garden.
• Rename hobbies to interests, because hobbies does sound old fashioned ;)
• Also have projects as optional part of each work entry, for specifying projects you did at that job. (More info here: Multiple projects per position #65)

[wfalkwallace]

+1 to "interests" > "hobbies"

[wfalkwallace]

What I was getting at with a combined hobbies/projects section is for hobbies like woodwork, and electronics there are sub-projects worth mentioning (stuff I've built and info/links for each project within the category of woodwork or electronics -- even fishing or gardening might have specific catches or blooms worth noting).
These sub-projects seem too small to be their own "projects" but worth distinguishing as their own items rather than just "hobby: woodwork". Is the solution to have a hundred "projects" or to have a project "woodwork" with "awards" or "highlights" for each sub-project?

[lostphilosopher]

+1 @dandydev's suggestion

[thomasdavis]

@opensourcegrrrl We should definitely dogfood this issue.

My thoughts are that Volunteer work will warrant it's own section, it's common for people to add that they volunteered at a Homeless shelter etc

The hard part is that for some odd reason open source, in my mind doesn't belong in Volunteer work.

I'd like to see projects go in which would more or less just be work without the commercial orientation. To keep things simple I would vote to not put projects into work yet and let the highlights array take care of that.

renaming hobbies to interets +1

[thomasdavis]

This issue has been elevated to decision needed

[osg]

@wfalkwallace, in your +1 to "interests" > "hobbies" response, I understand that as, +1 for "interests".

(To me, I am reading from a word perspective. Therefore, "+1 for changing interests to hobbies", but I do not think that is what you mean. I think you intend "+1 to interests being greater (a better option) to hobbies.")

Did I get that right?

[osg]

@thomasdavis:

+1 for separating volunteer work
+1 for separating open-source projects (often have end/release dates) from volunteer work (no end date)
+1 for keeping non-work projects out of work; if they are work, one is describing one's job.

[ocram]

@opensourcegrrrl Yes, I think you got that right. Interpreted the bracket as an arrow as well, first.

[DonDebonair]

So to summarise what we'll get:

• root-level section for volunteer work. What should we call it? volunteerWork?
• root-level section for (open-source) projects. I think this should be called projects.
• root-level section called interests, instead of hobbies

Is this a good summary? For me, the above is a solid +1.

[osg]

+1
On Jul 13, 2014 5:09 AM, "Daan Debie" notifications@github.com wrote:

So to summarise what we'll get:

• root-level section for volunteer work. What should we call it?
  volunteerWork?
• root-level section for (open-source) projects. I think this should
  be called projects.
• root-level section called interests, instead of hobbies

Is this a good summary? For me, the above is a solid +1.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#38 (comment)
.

[mhess126]

I've added an Open Source Contributions section to my personal fork. In my opinion "Hobbies", "Projects", and "Open Source" are all distinct categories.

Hobbies should be tangential to relevant work skills. If a 'hobby' is relevant to work skills, "Project" gives it more weight. Also, "Project" is generic to lots of professions.

For a software engineer, "Open Source" is vitally important to showcase if a person has made contributions.

On "Hobbies" vs "Interests" maybe the theme should determine the label for the same set in the schema. I could see using either one.

[thomasdavis]

I think an opensource category makes sense, it's going to have a lot of different properties that aren't really specific to anything else. But we might throw that discussion in another issue.

For now we will split out volunteer work into another property volunteerWork or volunteer.

hobbies will be changed to interests

projects will be created and will copy the same format as work

How does that sound?

[joelewis]

Great!
I was so hungry for the projects section, that I went ahead and forked jsonresume-theme-modern to support such a section.
Waiting for projects section to become a part of the standard.

[lostphilosopher]

@thomasdavis That all sounds great to me. I'd be happy to provide a PR if this decision gets finalized.

[osg]

+1
On Jul 18, 2014 8:39 AM, "Thomas Davis" notifications@github.com wrote:

I think an opensource category makes sense, it's going to have a lot of
different properties that aren't really specific to anything else. But we
might throw that discussion in another issue.

For now we will split out volunteer work into another property
volunteerWork or volunteer.

hobbies will be changed to interests

projects will be created and will copy the same format as work

How does that sound?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#38 (comment)
.

[thomasdavis]

ok well

• projects section with the same properties as work
• change hobbies to interests
• volunteer will be fleshed out and voted on this issue -> Add Volunteer Experience #43

It seems like opensource might become a label for the project section or just specified in description/highlights

[thomasdavis]

Issue marked as PR needed

[thomasdavis]

I've added in volunteer.

But need some stronger evidence for projects at this point.

[l15k4]

I'm also waiting for a project section, I've been here like 5 times already :-) I think that the schema should be structured to define a list of OSS github projects. A project has at least a name, description, highlights, url and a list of technologies used.

[thomasdavis]

Seems like we've got a lot of discussion around projects now and should be able to make a decision.

[dannief]

I like @extrajordanary's idea off adding an optional section name. This would be relevant to most sections actually and is really a separate issue.

Regarding projects, I think this is very much needed. I tend to add a section like this to my resume under "Other Work", implying things I've done that might not directly relate to my current career or the job I'm applying to, but I'd still like to highlight.

So I'm all for having the schema add this section and also add sectionName property added to all sections. (This would make templates more generic and I wouldn't have to customize a template just to give the section a different name)

If this ends up being called "projects" though, I'm not sure if it would really convey that I am really highlighting other work experience. E.g. supposed I was a lawyer and then decided to become a programmer. I might want to still highlight some of my law experience under "Other Work Experience". Projects would seem to imply stuff I've done on my own time. Maybe we also need "Other Work Experience"?

[DonDebonair]

So where are we with this decision (I've been out of the loop for a while)? It seems that we still want to add projects, right?

[mudassir0909]

Agree with @extrajordanary's approach of adding a sectionName

[matiassingers]

Any movement on the project/portfolio property?

[roadmanfong]

+1 project and portfolio

[camilleriluke]

+1 to project / portfolio section

[chris-barry]

+1

[DonDebonair]

+1 for projects section

[dbkaplun]

+1

[nihey]

+1 to projects / portifolio

[stp-ip]

I think that both opensource and portfolio could be done in the projects section. We want to be generic and not too specific on a profession. Splitting it up complicates the spec and does not really add value, especially when the projects section has enough attributes to be generic enough to be used for foss and design work.

[hacksalot]

Agree with @stp-ip and with our friend Occam and his razor. Has anybody experimented with adding an optional flavor or type field to the base item record as a distinguisher?

projects: [
  {
    /* ... */
    flavor: 'foss'
  },
  { 
    /* ... */
    flavor: 'portfolio'
  }
]

This also works for stuff like education (flavor: cert, degree, continuing, equivalency) or publications although bibJSON has a similar notation built in.

[aloisdg]

Agreed with @stp-ip and @hacksalot.

As an alternative to flavor and type that I like, I propose category.

[brpaz]

HI. I found out JSON resume today and looks really awesome but yeah, as a developer "projects" section is a must have.

[sosukeinu]

+1 for projects/portfolio. As for the reasoning, the ability to highlight personal projects (which many developers use to try out new technologies) seems perfectly in-line with JSON Resume's stated purpose of being "For developers, by developers."

[zvory]

+1 for projects, I was very surprised when there was no section for projects.

[aloisdg]

For now, I use "volunteer" for this. I am a volunteer on my own project.

[StevenBlack]

Reference for scope and nomenclature: CreativeWork at schema.org.

[mateusfreira]

+1

[chrisdotcode]

Are we discussing this in some other issue? Or is this the definition discussion about it?

[stp-ip]

Some of the discussion for projects was done in #201 as we wanted to make a clear distinction between work, project and events. So there is at least a few nice pointers and results in #201.

[chrisdotcode]

Yes, #201 was the issue I was thinking of.

[olivif]

Create a new issue to aggregate old discussions. I think everything discussed here is covered, but please re-open if I missed anything 😄