Skip to content
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

Trip being part of Trip + isPartOf extended beyond CreativeWork via Pending proposal #1968

Closed
danbri opened this Issue Jun 22, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@danbri
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 22, 2018

@RichardWallis I'm not super happy with this change to the core, which snuck through as part of a pending proposal for touristy stuff. It is entirely reasonable to want to relate trips in this way, but we should not have made a core change to the (currently 100% CreativeWork-centric) isPartOf property as part of the tourism proposal. My bad for not catching this earlier.

      <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">hasPart</span>
      <span>Domain: <a property="http://schema.org/domainIncludes" href="http://schema.org/Trip">Trip</a></span>
      <span>rangeIncludes: <a property="http://schema.org/rangeIncludes" href="http://schema.org/Trip">Trip</a></span>
      <span>Category: <span property="schema:category">issue-1810</span></span>
    </div>
    <div typeof="rdf:Property" resource="http://schema.org/isPartOf">
      <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">isPartOf</span>
      <span>Domain: <a property="http://schema.org/domainIncludes" href="http://schema.org/Trip">Trip</a></span>
      <span>rangeIncludes: <a property="http://schema.org/rangeIncludes" href="http://schema.org/Trip">Trip</a></span>
      <span>Category: <span property="schema:category">issue-1810</span></span>
    </div>

This looks like a bug to me. Many times we've had this discussion and there has never been consensus in the community or steering group to generalize isPartOf to other entity types. At this point I always point at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mereology/ and say "do we really want to go there"? I continue to believe we don't want to go there.

@rvguha can you give some KR oversight here please. The desire is for our existing Trip type to have a pattern for trips being parts of trips.

I believe we have prior consensus

From #1097 (comment) in 2016,

Richard: At first glance the basic proposal of having Thing in the range of isPartOf
that raises a +1 from me.
Vicki: Do we have a use case for this change? I hesitate to make such a large change without a compelling use case.
Dan:
My proposal would be to define dedicated properties for specific use cases e.g. for food we might have containsChemical, for places we already have containsPlace, for people who are "part of" organizations we have already got "affiliation", and for sub-events within a larger/longer containing event, we already have subEvent.
Guha: I tend to agree with Vicki and Dan. I would really like to avoid going down the path of making Thing the domain and range of too many properties.

The question to me seems to be - do we handle trips via Event, or do they have a good reason to be handled separately as an Intangible. There have been reasonable questions asked on the mailing list about this recently too.

@RichardWallis

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 22, 2018

@danbri I see where you are coming from....

We could go with subTrip, but I hesitate to suggest superTrip (it sounds like an endorsement to take the trip!) perhaps subTrip and partOfTrip would be a better pair.

As to handling Trip via Event instead of Intangible , I wasn't entirely convinced by the reference you mentioned which seemed to suggest that many, many things were really Event subtypes.

A trip, in the travel world can often be described as an itinerary of destinations only potentially becoming an actual event, if tickets are purchased. Purchase an around the world ticket; the bus trip from one city to another, can be described, with provider etc. that happens everyday; the [recommended] TouristTrip you should take across Australia if you had the inclination and finance; etc., etc.

@thadguidry

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 22, 2018

@danbri The "agreement" we sorta had with the community was that we would add support for "legs of a Trip". How that surfaces into Types or Properties is what needs to be sorted in this issue. I am open to anything, as long as we can support "multiple connected itineraries", or "legs of a Trip". I'd vote for any simple relationship pairing. @RichardWallis 's subTrip is fine.

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jun 23, 2018

@RichardWallis - I agree, if you're not careful, you end up seeing the entire universe of human experience through the "event" lens, which is a lot of pressure to put on one data structure.

@rvguha @vholland - what do you think about subTrip for multi-hop Trip "legs", instead of overloading the CreativeWork-centric isPartOf?

RichardWallis pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 23, 2018

Fix for issue (#1968)
Removed Trip from domain & range of hasPart & ispartOf
Introduced subTrip & ispartOfTrip properties in replacement
Updated examples & regenerated release files.
@RichardWallis

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 23, 2018

Created new branch based upon the v3.4-release tagged version
It contains:

  • domainIncludes & rangeIncludes of hasPart & isPartOf now only contain CreativeWork
  • Add two new properties with domainIncludes & rangeIncludes of Trip:
    • subTrip "Identifies a Trip that is a subTrip of this Trip. For example Day 1, Day 2, etc. of a multi-day trip."
    • partOfTrip "Identifies that this Trip is a subTrip of another Trip. For example Day 1, Day 2, etc. of a multi-day trip."
  • Regenerated release files

This could be used to hotfix the current release and then be merged into master.
/cc @danbri

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jun 24, 2018

@RichardWallis thanks! Note that we do not hotfix vocabulary, only software issues and bugs. So don't regenerate a release, this will be in 3.5. The subTrip/partOfTrip properties should be in Pending, are they?

@RichardWallis

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 24, 2018

@danbri I went for the bugfix labelling approach, following your labelling it as a bug, however we do not need to follow through on that.

[In the new branch I referenced] the subTrip/partOfTrip properties, plus the updated effected examples are in pending - in files issue-1810.rdfa and issue-1810-examples.txt.

The extension of the rangeIncludes and domainInclude for hasPart & isPartOf to include Trip was also in issue-1810.rdfa, now removed from the version in this branch.

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 13, 2018

What's the status of this? Can you make a PR against master/ branch for v3.5, including a note for docs/releases.html

RichardWallis pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jul 17, 2018

Fix for issue (#1968)
Removed Trip from domain & range of hasPart & ispartOf
Introduced subTrip & ispartOfTrip properties in replacement
Updated examples & regenerated release files.

danbri added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 21, 2019

V3.4 Tourism Fix (#2014)
* Fix for issue (#1968)
Removed Trip from domain & range of hasPart & ispartOf
Introduced subTrip & ispartOfTrip properties in replacement
Updated examples & regenerated release files.

* Fix for issue (#1968)
Removed Trip from domain & range of hasPart & ispartOf
Introduced subTrip & ispartOfTrip properties in replacement
Updated examples & regenerated release files.

* tweak destination description

* Reinstated changed V3.4 release files

* Removed update to schemaorg.owl

* Bring relases.html in line with master

* Added release text to releases.html
@RichardWallis

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 10, 2019

Implemented in release 3.5

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.