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

Inconvenient change to schema:publication #366

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

Inconvenient change to schema:publication #366

realworldobject opened this issue Feb 27, 2015 · 8 comments

Comments

@realworldobject
Copy link

@realworldobject realworldobject commented Feb 27, 2015

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
Copy link
Contributor

@danbri 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
Copy link
Contributor

@danbri danbri commented Apr 9, 2015

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

Imaginative, I know.

@realworldobject
Copy link
Author

@realworldobject realworldobject commented Apr 9, 2015

+1

principle of least astonishment

@danbri
Copy link
Contributor

@danbri danbri commented Apr 15, 2015

Done & done.

danbri added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 15, 2015
@Dataliberate
Copy link
Contributor

@Dataliberate Dataliberate commented May 6, 2015

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

@danbri
Copy link
Contributor

@danbri danbri commented May 6, 2015

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

@Dataliberate
Copy link
Contributor

@Dataliberate Dataliberate commented May 6, 2015

Domain CreativeWork that is +1

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

@danbri 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
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
3 participants