Discussion: Should we remove Activity Opportunity?

[ldodds]

The 1.0 modelling specification defines an "Activity Opportunity". These are self-directed activities, that take place in a specific location, but at a time of the participants choosing. E.g. a walking trail, or mountain bike course.

The assumption has been that these should be described similarly to Events but without the timing and scheduling properties.

We haven't yet decided how to model walking or cycling routes, but these are separate concerns.

But the facilities proposal (#62) also describes use of a specific amenity for a self-directed activity?

Should we remove Activity Opportunity and say that something like a walking trail is an Amenity Use (a Product)? Or are these distinct enough entities?

If we remove Activity Opportunity then we would need to:

• make events optional on AmenityUse, as they don't make sense for this type of opportunity
• rev the specification to 2.0 as this is a breaking change

An alternative approach would be to just come up with a different name for this type of opportunity, e.g. "Self Directed Opportunity"

[nickevansuk]

Suggest that Routes (walking trail) and facilities (tennis court) replaces the original Activity Opportunity, but we do need something to cater for on-demand fitness opportunities such as https://www.lesmills.com/ondemand/

[thill-odi]

We do have cases where events are organised to exploit a particular Route (e.g. a treasure hunt, guided walk, or running-club meet). Suggest we add an attribute route to Events, Sessions, and the like which can take a URL or Route object as its value?