Add enumerated values for http://schema.org/paymentStatus

[vholland]

http://schema.org/paymentStatus takes text. It would be nice to also take defined values. Initially, we should support the following and maybe others.

PaymentComplete
PaymentDue
PaymentPastDue
PaymentDeclined

[vholland]

Implemented as pull request #523.

[danbri]

/cc @mfhepp

[chaals]

WfM. The feature creep in me looks for a partial payment made…

[mfhepp]

@chaals is right - we likely need a mechanism for deposits and partial payment. Would PartialPaymentReceived as an additional value be sufficient?

[danbri]

Per rough consensus in #587 I'm going to merge in #523. If there's interest her in addressing the partial payment / deposit angle, please continue here and we can refine.

[danbri]

Done (manually)

[danbri]

Looking at this, the enumeration wasn't showing up. I've tweaked the design from the pull request, s/Intangible/Enumeration/ and that does the job.

We might also consider that PaymentDue ("The payment is due, but still within an acceptable time to be received.") is named almost identically to the existing property http://schema.org/paymentDue ("The date that payment is due."). I would prefer not to do this - can we rename it to something more distinctive?

Related (if only by similar name) existing terms:

• http://schema.org/OrderPaymentDue
• http://schema.org/totalPaymentDue
• http://schema.org/minimumPaymentDue

[danbri]

See http://webschemas.org/PaymentStatusType for current release candidate (also in sdo-ganymede)

[vholland]

+1 OrderPaymentDue

[danbri]

That's from a different enumeration called http://schema.org/OrderStatus whose values are already:

OrderCancelled
OrderDelivered
OrderInTransit
OrderPaymentDue
OrderPickupAvailable
OrderProblem
OrderProcessing
OrderReturned

Are these two views of the same transactions? I don't know if one enumerated value being in both enumerated lists will work very well (technically, at least).

[danbri]

action: danbri test if multiple typing works

[scor]

Note that http://schema.org/OrderStatus and http://schema.org/orderStatus also both exist. I agree this should be avoided.

Since enumeration items are types in schema.org, this is prone to happen again. Is there a lot of value in having those as types as opposed to literal values which would not be clashing with the types?

[danbri]

Looking at this for the upcoming release, I am wary of (a) having one term (OrderPaymentDue) appear in two enumerations, as this will confuse navigation. The option (b) of converging the two lists I also believe unappealing, as they currently each address different situations: http://schema.org/OrderStatus vs http://sdo-ganymede.appspot.com/PaymentStatusType.

I believe the simplest fix which allows us to proceed and improves clarity of existing terms is for the current paymentDue property to migrate to an new more explicit name: paymentDueDate.

• http://schema.org/paymentDue{Date} ("The date that payment is due."). I'll queue that up for review.

[danbri]

rdfa schema.rdfa | grep -i date | grep Property | awk '{print $1}'
    <http://schema.org/productionDate>
    <http://schema.org/scheduledPaymentDate>
    <http://schema.org/orderDate>
    <http://schema.org/liveBlogUpdate>
    <http://schema.org/candidate>
    <http://schema.org/dateModified>
    <http://schema.org/datePublished>
    <http://schema.org/releaseDate>
    <http://schema.org/candidate>
    <http://schema.org/endDate>
    <http://schema.org/dateline>
    <http://schema.org/startDate>
    <http://schema.org/dissolutionDate>
    <http://schema.org/uploadDate>
    <http://schema.org/vehicleModelDate>
    <http://schema.org/deathDate>
    <http://schema.org/foundingDate>
    <http://schema.org/dateCreated>
    <http://schema.org/purchaseDate>
    <http://schema.org/dateIssued>
    <http://schema.org/birthDate>
    <http://schema.org/previousStartDate>
    <http://schema.org/guidelineDate>
    <http://schema.org/dateVehicleFirstRegistered>
    <http://schema.org/datePosted>

Bit of research to answer the question...

Q: Should property names end with 'date' or start with 'date'?
A: Yes.

[vholland]

We also confuse 'date' and 'time'. See issue #524

[danbri]

Ok, I think we're done here. Please review c/o http://sdo-ganymede.appspot.com/docs/releases.html#sdo-ganymede