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

numberOfEmployees should be applicable to Organization #456

Closed
danbri opened this Issue Apr 28, 2015 · 6 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@danbri
Contributor

danbri commented Apr 28, 2015

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2015Apr/0059.html

why is the domain of http://schema.org/numberOfEmployees set to
schema:BusinessAudience? Shouldn't it be schema:Organization instead?

Although https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2015Apr/0060.html points out, some organizations might not have employees (e.g. a Residents' Association, or Anarchists Society, or many kinds of club), there are many kinds of organization for which an employee count is relevant.

Regarding Scope, let's keep this fix simple. Context: It is also worth noting that some organizations have important relationships other than employment, and that schema.org does not enumerate all such relations. For example, the students or alumni of a University are not employees. Similarly with companies and their owners, customers and contractors. If we were to attempt a general approach to counting, we would need to include time as a parameter (and probably model with Role). There are also some discussions around other count-related properties, which like numberOfEmployees are hardcoded for a particular measure at a particular time (e.g. see offerCount, ratingCount, upvoteCount, downvoteCount, answerCount, UserPlays, screenCount, answerCount, wordCount, reviewCount). The point of this paragraph is to argue that a simple fix is the best action at this point.

Proposal:

  • Add: numberOfEmployees domainIncludes Organization

This is worth doing immediately, without delaying for any broader discussion of other relationship types (e.g. http://schema.org/member), time-indexing, etc. Note that there has also been some discussion about a generalized model for measurement, motivated by modeling concerns around sport, where many different kinds of thing are counted obsessively. See https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Measurement

@vholland

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vholland

vholland Apr 29, 2015

Contributor

+1 sounds good to me.

Contributor

vholland commented Apr 29, 2015

+1 sounds good to me.

@chaals

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@chaals

chaals Apr 30, 2015

Contributor

+1 for the record

Contributor

chaals commented Apr 30, 2015

+1 for the record

@mfhepp

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mfhepp

mfhepp Apr 30, 2015

Contributor

It would make sense to include QuantitativeValue to the range of numberOfEmployees, for this will allow ranges (50 - 100 employees), or open intervals (up to 50, at least 5 employees).

Contributor

mfhepp commented Apr 30, 2015

It would make sense to include QuantitativeValue to the range of numberOfEmployees, for this will allow ranges (50 - 100 employees), or open intervals (up to 50, at least 5 employees).

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri Apr 30, 2015

Contributor

@mfhepp - I believe we do that already. http://schema.org/numberOfEmployees

Contributor

danbri commented Apr 30, 2015

@mfhepp - I believe we do that already. http://schema.org/numberOfEmployees

@mfhepp

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mfhepp

mfhepp Apr 30, 2015

Contributor

You are right, sorry! No need for action.

Contributor

mfhepp commented Apr 30, 2015

You are right, sorry! No need for action.

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri Apr 30, 2015

Contributor

Np, thanks for following the issue tracker :)

Contributor

danbri commented Apr 30, 2015

Np, thanks for following the issue tracker :)

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