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

BroadcastService supertype should be Service, not Thing. #315

Closed
danbri opened this Issue Feb 3, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@danbri
Contributor

danbri commented Feb 3, 2015

We have a variety of service-related types, and it makes not sense for BroadcastService to sit at the top below http://schema.org/Thing - let's find a better home for it. Proposal: set supertype of BroadcastService to be http://schema.org/Service. It was a mistake to add it under Thing, rather than under Intangible or Service.

Nearby we currently have:

Although you could argue that the FinancialService and ProfessionalService types aren't necessarily local and also shouldn't be all under http://schema.org/Service, that's a wider debate.

http://schema.org/Service seems a bearable if vague fit. It is under Intangible, and already has a couple of subtypes (Taxi and GovernmentService).

/cc @vholland

@rvguha

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rvguha

rvguha Feb 3, 2015

Contributor

sgtm

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Dan Brickley notifications@github.com
wrote:

We have a variety of service-related types, and it makes not sense for
BroadcastService to sit at the top below http://schema.org/Thing - let's
find a better home for it. Proposal: set supertype of BroadcastService to
be http://schema.org/Service. It was a mistake to add it under Thing,
rather than under Intangible or Service.

Nearby we currently have:

Although you could argue that the FinancialService and ProfessionalService
types aren't necessarily local and also shouldn't be all under
http://schema.org/Service, that's a wider debate.

http://schema.org/Service seems a bearable if vague fit. It is under
Intangible, and already has a couple of subtypes (Taxi and
GovernmentService).

/cc @vholland https://github.com/vholland


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#315.

Contributor

rvguha commented Feb 3, 2015

sgtm

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Dan Brickley notifications@github.com
wrote:

We have a variety of service-related types, and it makes not sense for
BroadcastService to sit at the top below http://schema.org/Thing - let's
find a better home for it. Proposal: set supertype of BroadcastService to
be http://schema.org/Service. It was a mistake to add it under Thing,
rather than under Intangible or Service.

Nearby we currently have:

Although you could argue that the FinancialService and ProfessionalService
types aren't necessarily local and also shouldn't be all under
http://schema.org/Service, that's a wider debate.

http://schema.org/Service seems a bearable if vague fit. It is under
Intangible, and already has a couple of subtypes (Taxi and
GovernmentService).

/cc @vholland https://github.com/vholland


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#315.

@jvandriel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jvandriel

jvandriel Feb 3, 2015

Sorry for crossposting but could http://schema.org/MedicalProcedure have http://schema.org/Service set as supertype as well, as raised in issue #296 ?

jvandriel commented Feb 3, 2015

Sorry for crossposting but could http://schema.org/MedicalProcedure have http://schema.org/Service set as supertype as well, as raised in issue #296 ?

@danbri danbri referenced this issue Apr 9, 2015

Closed

Meta bug for sdo-gozer release - vocab issues #418

19 of 36 tasks complete

@danbri danbri closed this in 217ac4c Apr 15, 2015

@tmarshbing

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tmarshbing

tmarshbing Apr 15, 2015

This change looks good, but it also creates an awkward duplication between area and serviceArea, both of which are now applicable to BroadcastService. Should we deprecate area as part of this change?

tmarshbing commented Apr 15, 2015

This change looks good, but it also creates an awkward duplication between area and serviceArea, both of which are now applicable to BroadcastService. Should we deprecate area as part of this change?

@vholland

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vholland

vholland Apr 15, 2015

Contributor

+1 to deprecating area.

Contributor

vholland commented Apr 15, 2015

+1 to deprecating area.

danbri added a commit that referenced this issue May 14, 2015

Somehow we reverted #315 and 217ac4c
This fixes  #315 again, defining Service as the supertype of BroadcastService.
Thanks @unor for reporting this and @vholland for confirming the intent.
Fixes #493
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment