Inconvenient change to schema:publication #366

Closed
realworldobject opened this Issue Feb 27, 2015 · 8 comments

Projects

None yet

3 participants

@realworldobject

I notice that schema:publication has changed in such a way that it raises doubts about use for schema:Book. I suppose the schema:releasedEvent could be used instead, but it doesn't flow off the tongue and changing it now will be awkward. As a compromise, could you add a few more subclasses of CreativeWork to the list of types where schema:publication seems appropriate?

@danbri danbri added this to the sdo-gozer release milestone Mar 16, 2015
@danbri danbri self-assigned this Mar 16, 2015
@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Mar 16, 2015

If 'publication' previously had broader semantics, this may be an implementation bug. I forget offhand if the property was added for the TV/radio changes, or existed beforehand. It seems to have been like this for a while e.g. https://web.archive.org/web/20131121225532/http://schema.org/publication ... I'll need to dig around a bit for earlier definitions (and yes, that situation could also be improved).

It seems reasonable to have a more general sense, given the general name of the property.

/cc @vholland

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Apr 9, 2015

I suggest "A publication event associated with the item."

Imaginative, I know.

@realworldobject

+1

principle of least astonishment

@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 added a commit that closed this issue Apr 15, 2015
@danbri danbri Fixed shopping list of types with 'item'.
Fixes #366 and restores book-friendlyness.
472dbd8
@danbri danbri closed this in 472dbd8 Apr 15, 2015
@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented Apr 15, 2015

Done & done.

@danbri danbri added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 15, 2015
@danbri danbri Noting fix for #366 2980284
@Dataliberate
Contributor

As this restores book friendliness - shouldn't we have at least Book or maybe CreativeWork in its domain?

@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented May 6, 2015

I'd support that - it is effectively what the definition now says. Anyone here think otherwise?

@Dataliberate
Contributor

Domain CreativeWork that is +1

@danbri danbri reopened this May 7, 2015
@danbri danbri closed this in b99d854 May 11, 2015
@danbri
Contributor
danbri commented May 11, 2015

CreativeWork. Done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment