Add vocabulary for describing vehicles / automobiles / automotive #262

Closed
danbri opened this Issue Jan 22, 2015 · 13 comments

Projects

None yet

3 participants

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Jan 22, 2015

http://schema.org/Car
http://schema.org/Vehicle

A substantial and detailed proposal has been prepared by Martin Hepp, see associated pull request: #80

Announcement / discussion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Dec/0057.html

Original W3C wiki link https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Vehicles

See 2015-01-09 review from @tmarshbing which suggests amongst other things partitioning the proposal into smaller sections.

See also #263 for the property-value proposal, which supports the proposal.

@danbri danbri self-assigned this Jan 22, 2015
@danbri danbri changed the title from Add vocabulary for describing vehicles / automobiles to Add vocabulary for describing vehicles / automobiles / automotive Jan 29, 2015
@mfhepp
Contributor
mfhepp commented Mar 13, 2015

I have just created a pull request

#379

that is a trimmed-down version of the automotive part of the original proposal and addresses the comments received in the meantime.

@mfhepp
Contributor
mfhepp commented Mar 13, 2015

Note that we need #263 (Property-Values) for this proposal to be consistent, because the unitText property is referenced but not contained in this pull request.

@danbri danbri added this to the sdo-gozer release milestone May 5, 2015
@mfhepp
Contributor
mfhepp commented May 5, 2015

Is the logo for the respective blogpost ;-) ?

@danbri danbri added a commit that referenced this issue May 12, 2015
@danbri danbri Partitioned Auto vocabulary into core + ext/ (latter queued for later).
Commented out keywords in the examples file for now, pending review/update of that.
Addresses #262
e35b240
@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented May 12, 2015

This is partially queued up for sdo-gozer and partially coming later as an extension. I'll therefore leave the issue open and update the milestone.

See http://sdo-gozer.appspot.com/docs/releases.html#automotive

@danbri danbri modified the milestone: 2015 Q2, sdo-gozer release May 12, 2015
@danbri danbri added a commit that referenced this issue May 13, 2015
@danbri danbri Updated with some missing automotive vocabulary that was supposed to …
…be included in Core.

Summary:

properties:

bodyType
vehicleIdentificationNumber (vin)
cargoVolume
vehicleConfiguration (was configuration)
knownVehicleDamages (was damages)
dateVehicleFirstRegistered (was dateFirstRegistered ) DISCUSS
doors (added as numberOfDoors)
driveWheelConfiguration
fuelType
vehicleInteriorColor (was interiorColor)
vehicleInteriorType (was interiorType)
mileageFromOdometer
vehicleModelDate (was modelDate)
numberOfPreviousOwners (was previousOwners)
productionDate ( generalized: "e.g." vehicle, added broader domain Product)
purchaseDate (generalized similarly)
vehicleSeatingCapacity (seatingCapacity)
vehicleTransmission (originally transmission)
steeringPosition
vehicleSpecialUsage (was specialUsage )

type:
CarUsageType

enums:
RentalVehicleUsage, RentalVehicleUsage, DrivingSchoolVehicleUsage, TaxiVehicleUsage

See also #262

Note that some of these renamings or definition tweaks were not fully discussed with
Martin Hepp, although from our prior discussions I believe they ought to be uncontroversial.

The reason for the tweaks is that we are trying to avoid using generic term names for
specific meanings. Therefore we either add more context into the term name, or soften the
definition to be applicable in more situations. In this case we have mostly made the terms
more specific.

/cc @tmarshbing @vholland
f1eaf07
@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented May 13, 2015

Q: I see "Typical unit code(s): C62" in several definitions but don't understand this. Searching around it seems to be in the original OWL ontology from @mfhepp too, so I don't think I introduced it in error.

@mfhepp
Contributor
mfhepp commented May 13, 2015

C62 is the correct un/cefact common code for "piece" or "no unit".

martin


martin hepp
www: http://www.heppnetz.de/
email: mhepp@computer.org

On 13.05.2015, at 22:30, Dan Brickley notifications@github.com wrote:

Q: I see "Typical unit code(s): C62" in several definitions but don't understand this. Searching around it seems to be in the original OWL ontology from @mfhepp too, so I don't think I introduced it in error.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented May 13, 2015

Ah, thanks.

I thought you were up a mountain!

We made some last minute tweaks but http://schema.org/Car is live. Can you take a quick look? The tweaks were all in the direction discussed previously, i.e. avoiding "using up" generic terms for vehicle-specific concepts. Mostly the changes were to names to indicate the vehicle scope, although in a couple of places they're slightly broadened (to Product). See f1eaf07 for a summary.

@jvandriel

"I thought you were up a mountain!"

Can't we leave the man alone for one week? ;)

@mfhepp
Contributor
mfhepp commented May 19, 2015

If this is not considered too specific a topic, it could be added to the FAQs - what do you think?

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented May 19, 2015

We have a fairly weak high-level overview of all our vocabulary at http://schema.org/docs/schemas.html (and linked from navigation toolbar on each page). I'd suggest updating that would be more useful.

Re FAQ I am also thinking to create a "technical FAQ" with some details in, e.g. url/URL,sameAs, mainEntity...

@mfhepp
Contributor
mfhepp commented May 19, 2015

I think we should close this issue and continue work on the automotive extension part as #509

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented May 19, 2015

Agreed. -> #509

@danbri danbri closed this May 19, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment