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

Orders schema updates #266

Closed
danbri opened this issue Jan 22, 2015 · 7 comments
Closed

Orders schema updates #266

danbri opened this issue Jan 22, 2015 · 7 comments
Assignees
Labels
schema.org vocab General top level tag for issues on the vocabulary status:old proposals Proposals that are inactive, abandoned, obsolete or handled another way. status:work expected We are likely to, or would like to, or probably should try, ... to do something in this area.

Comments

@danbri
Copy link
Contributor

danbri commented Jan 22, 2015

http://schema.org/Order

Wiki proposal: https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Orders_enhancement

@danbri danbri added the status:old proposals Proposals that are inactive, abandoned, obsolete or handled another way. label Jan 22, 2015
@vholland vholland self-assigned this Jan 22, 2015
@danbri danbri added schema.org vocab General top level tag for issues on the vocabulary status:implementing status:work expected We are likely to, or would like to, or probably should try, ... to do something in this area. and removed status:implementing labels Jan 29, 2015
@danbri danbri added this to the 2015 Q1 milestone Jan 29, 2015
vholland added a commit to vholland/schemaorg that referenced this issue Feb 5, 2015
@vholland
Copy link
Contributor

vholland commented Feb 5, 2015

@tmarshbing
Copy link

For orderItemId, should we rename that to orderItemNumber to be consistent with http://schema.org/orderNumber?

How can you tell the product ordered for a given OrderItem? I see the property from Order -> orderedItem -> OrderItem, but I think we should also add OrderItem to the domain of orderedItem. Which then introduces the possibility of a loop. If we're worried about the loop, we could always separate out orderedItem (range Product) from a new property orderLine (range OrderItem, which could then be renamed to OrderLine).

@realworldobject
Copy link

Or perhaps:

schema:id
a rdf:Property;
schema:domainIncludes schema:Thing;
schema:rangeIncludes schema:Text .

On Mar 10, 2015, at 7:45 PM, tmarshbing <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

For orderItemId, should we rename that to orderItemNumber to be consistent with http://schema.org/orderNumber?

How can you tell the product ordered for a given OrderItem? I see the property from Order -> orderedItem -> OrderItem, but I think we should also add OrderItem to the domain of orderedItem. Which then introduces the possibility of a loop. If we're worried about the loop, we could always separate out orderedItem (range Product) from a new property orderLine (range OrderItem, which could then be renamed to OrderLine).

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/266#issuecomment-78173190.

@vholland
Copy link
Contributor

I updated the pull request to add orderedItem to the list of properties. This allows one to link directly from the OrderItem to the Product.

I also added an example of this.

@tmarshbing
Copy link

Looks good!

@chaals
Copy link
Contributor

chaals commented Mar 20, 2015

Looks OK to me.

@vholland vholland modified the milestones: sdo-gozer release, 2015 Q1 Apr 2, 2015
vholland added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 8, 2015
Issue #266: Merged in proposed schema with minor name changes to avoid conflicts.
@vholland
Copy link
Contributor

vholland commented Apr 8, 2015

Merged into sdo-gozer.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
schema.org vocab General top level tag for issues on the vocabulary status:old proposals Proposals that are inactive, abandoned, obsolete or handled another way. status:work expected We are likely to, or would like to, or probably should try, ... to do something in this area.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants