serviceAudience vs. audience #145

Closed
elf-pavlik opened this Issue Oct 7, 2014 · 9 comments

Projects

None yet

4 participants

@elf-pavlik
Contributor

http://schema.org/audience
http://schema.org/serviceAudience

related email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Oct/0023.html

I would suggest removing serviceAudience and using generic audience. If some reasons exist for not doing so maybe at least defining serviceAudience as subPropertyOf audience?

@elf-pavlik
Contributor

BTW Service may need some more tweaking, currently
Service --{serviceArea}--> AdministrativeArea
Service --{serviceAudience}--> Audience --{geographicArea}--> AdministrativeArea

@elf-pavlik
Contributor

also http://schema.org/serviceType doesn't make much sense to my, maybe better to allow additionalType to accept Text since people focusing on RDF will most likely use multiple values on type ?

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Jan 21, 2015

@elf-pavlik 's proposal seems sensible to me. @vholland - any thoughts?

@danbri danbri added this to the 2015 Q1 milestone Jan 21, 2015
@danbri danbri self-assigned this Jan 21, 2015
@vholland
Contributor

Sounds good to me.

@elf-pavlik elf-pavlik added a commit to elf-pavlik/schemaorg that referenced this issue Jan 25, 2015
@elf-pavlik elf-pavlik removed serviceAudience and reused audience rel #145 fe9b70d
@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Jan 25, 2015

Thanks. Historically it is pretty rare for us to actually erase terms, so far we usually just mark as supersededBy. In this case maybe that is too conservative and best to avoid clutter. Any thoughts?

@sesuncedu
Contributor

You could mark the obsolete terms in HTML with . In the type rendering
you could group the obsoleted terms together with the term that obsoleted
them.

I've been treating superseded as implying sub property and obsolete .

The sub property relationship might be wrong, if a superseding property can
have a narrower meaning than the older term.

@elf-pavlik
Contributor

@danbri if you like I can revert | drop this change and then use schema:supersededBy instead!

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Feb 7, 2015

Yes, I think schema:supersededBy would be most appropriate here. @elf-pavlik could you tweak your branch that #285 draws from? I've filed this for the next release, and can't see it proving controversial.

Simon is right that we could say more about what it means. We have never said that it implies subPropertyOf, since it is easy enough to assert that independently at the same time where needed.

In this case I believe serviceAudience would also be a sub-property of audience.

@danbri danbri modified the milestone: sdo-gozer release, 2015 Q1 Apr 16, 2015
@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Apr 16, 2015

I've implemented this manually after failing with the pull request. I tweaked the definition to be "An intended audience, i.e. a group for whom something was created." rather than use "item" or "subject" to refer to the thing that has the audience. Also "an" rather than "the" since the property is repeatable.

@danbri danbri added a commit that closed this issue Apr 16, 2015
@danbri danbri serviceAudience supersededBy audience.
Fixes #145
955fa02
@danbri danbri closed this in 955fa02 Apr 16, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment