-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 825
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
Vocabulary for hotels, vacation homes, camping sites, etc. #915
Comments
Here are some quick thoughts. It would help with reviewing if there were more examples, as the usage is not always clear. Please let me know if anything is unclear.
|
@mfhepp - any thoughts on these questions? |
will reply in detail asap
|
thanks! |
@mfhepp I have lost track on where we are with this. Can you send out an update? One quick question I have is around buying vs renting. This would add a new House type with the idea of renting the House. How would you model a house sale? Make it the itemOffered in an Offer? |
The conversation has spanned a few different issues, so I am not sure where best to update, but my outstanding questions/comments are:
|
One more question. How does this work with http://schema.org/Residence and its subtypes? |
…tions from the physical spaces.
My concerns are twofold. First, we are forcing physical spaces into a model that works for rentals, but starts to make modeling other things more difficult. Second, the new proposal should integrate with the existing schema to avoid conflicts and confusion. To further the discussion, I have modified @mfhepp's proposal. (The complete list of changes is below.) to reflect the following:
As a result of moving these types around, the properties in the original proposal have been moved to either be on the physical place or the Accommodation as appropriate. The complete list of changes from pull request #916 are:
|
I have reviewed @vholland 's proposal and suggest we should stick with our approach and address the individual concerns / aspects individually. The modified PR in #1011 creates new inconsistencies, IMO. Here are my first comments, replying to the first part of comments by Vicki:
MH: An alternative solution is to include Accommodation to the domain of itemOffered and typeOfGood.
|
And here is my feedback to the second round of suggestions, as implemented in PR #1011:
As a result of moving these types around, the properties in the original proposal have been moved to either be on the physical place or the Accommodation as appropriate. For the other changes, I suggest to address them in the context of a separate real estate extension proposal. The risk of future conflicts are pretty low, IMO. One more thing: We should add a schema:businessFunction to all rental examples.
I hope you can accept these arguments. Please indicate and we can then quickly update PR #916 accordingly. |
@vholland @mfhepp - much as I would love to merge this work in for immediate release, it seems you are in mid-discussion. Any chance you could hop into a Skype/Hangout/phone call in next few days to try to resolve these differences? I am also now convinced that we should move to clockwork-based monthly releases, so the fear of "missing the release and waiting 2-3+ months" goes away. I'd like to publish a release in final days of March, and another at end of April, etc... |
Re star rating awards, note that we already have It is currently text valued but is close to the target meaning |
I agree that this is not ready for the next release. I will see if I can sync with @mfhepp offline, but would value other opinions as well. |
Hi Vicki, yes, let's try to sync up via Skype early next week. By then, we will also have the new pull request of mine that incorporates all consensual proposals. As for the general model:
But I strongly suggest to keep them as places, because they cleary "have a somewhat fixed, physical extension."
Currently, we already have
My proposal just adds
CampingSite is, as you pointed out, redundant and can be removed. So my proposal keeps the existing structure for hotels in schema.org unchanged.
My proposal just adds schema:Accommodation and the following five subtypes: More specific Types Most of them might also be useful for real estate, but the proposed pattern does not at all rule out this additional use, because we only have Place -> Accommodation as a supertype, like so: Thing > Place > Accommodation > House It is clear that one important difference between a Hotel, Motel, Resort etc. is that the former are a business and a place (as in the current schema.org model), while the subtypes of Accommodation and likely additional types for real estate are just subtypes of Place or Accommodation. "First, we are forcing physical spaces into a model that works for rentals, but starts to make modeling other things more difficult." By removing the Product supertype as agreed, this conflict should go away. "Second, the new proposal should integrate with the existing schema to avoid conflicts and confusion." Actually, I would argue that our proposal fits the existing structure of schema.org much stricter that your updated one. I think the thing we should discuss is whether we introduce Accommodation as a supertype for all places that can accommodate human beings, or whether we reuse Residence for this purpose. Martin martin hepp http://www.heppnetz.de
|
For anyone following along: Martin, Vicki and I had a call about this yesterday, to try to work through some of the disagreements. I think we made some reasonable progress. Martin will take the next step summarizing the rough consensus into a revised pull request (or failing that, textual note). |
Here is the list of agreed changes following the concall with @danbri and @vholland: They are not yet implemented in the pull request but will shortly.
|
@mfhepp - would it make sense to ship sdo-deimos as v2.3 and continue with this for the next release? I would like to get our release cycle back down to 6 weeks or less. Longer cycles end up in a self-fulfilling dynamic where we delay to include things (like this) and the "risk of missing the window" feels bigger because of concern that the next release will be similarly delayed. How close are we here to getting #915 closed and fully implemented? |
I will update the pull request according to our agreement in the next 48 hours, so the issue should be ready for shipment in 2.3.
|
How's it going, @mfhepp ? |
asap ;-) |
(Wanders past, waves...) |
(Don't forget room service and the minibar ...) |
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:55 AM, vholland <notifications@github.com
|
Please note that Dan, Vicki and I already agreed upon a solution for the ongoing discussion (see above - my message #915 (comment)). This is not yet implemented in the PR but I will craft this very quickly, ready for 2.3 |
Talking with @mfhepp we're not going to rush this out for the 3.0 (previously 2.3, but it got upgraded:) release currently under review. It is better to take the time to implement it carefully, given the subtlety of the issues and the ease of getting something wrong. |
@mfhepp do you want me to take a pass at the most obvious changes in #915 (comment) ? I could implement it into pending.webschemas.org for collaboration... |
This has been launched, see http://schema.org/docs/releases.html#v3.1 http://blog.schema.org/2016/08/schemaorg-update-hotels-datasets-health.html - thanks all! |
Published via http://schema.org/docs/releases.html#v3.1 Thanks everyone! |
@danbri @vholland @mfhepp Did we agree to Remove or Keep the numberOfRooms on Accommodation AND House ? I see some kinda mixup in the proposal and the Git pull itself for numberOfRooms it seems. This was supposed to happen from the proposal... But looking at House and Accomodation...they both have the property numberOfRooms. Do we care ? |
@thadguidry re numberOfRooms, I was persuaded by @brewerdigital's argument earlier this week that @mfhepp 's related edit may have been a failed attempt to add another type association to the property. I attached it to Accommodation (instead of Hotel) but this may not have been as intended. If so we can adjust it ASAP. I had to make a last minute judgment call and it's quite possible it wasn't ideal - I remember some discussion about room counting different in real estate vs hotel situations (i.e. whether you count the bathroom). |
I think the story was that the property had initially been attached to Accommodation, but this created the inconsistency that e.g. HotelRooms can themselves have this property, so we ended up listing a few relevant types manually. Feel free to fix the domain of this property. |
https://schema.org/CampingPitch needs https://schema.org/occupancy In the Caravan / RV world, lots are priced at per max occupancy of around 2 adults. This is to account for the water/sewage and sometimes electrical usage for that offering. @mfhepp |
Would occupancy be better placed on Accommodation? |
+1
…On 18.09.20 14:22, Richard Wallis wrote:
Would _occupancy_ be better placed on _Accommodation_?
|
I like the idea of moving occupancy to Accommodation, expanding the range beyond the listed types here:
https://schema.org/occupancy
…--Eric
Eric Axel Franzon
Sent from my iPhone. All typos have been carefully hand-crafted for your enjoyment.
On Sep 18, 2020, at 8:38 AM, Denver Prophit Jr. ***@***.***> wrote:
Would occupancy be better placed on Accommodation?
A campingPitch, even if just a tent space rented from an RV park puts limits on the occupancy. Because the rate is calculated on COGS. The water, power and sewage all costs money. Couldn't have 12 people in a camping log based on 2 adult price.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
|
I do also @EricAxel it would make it easier for my purposes. |
From what I see, I concur with Eric Franzon and Denver Prophit, Jr.
Jeannie Hill
Hill Web Creations
Digital Marketing, Google Analytics, PPC & SEO Consultant | When you're
serious about marketing, you employ winning strategies.
Office 651.460.2496 <(651)%20460-2496> |Cell 651.206.2410
<(651)%20206-2410>
jeannie@hillwebcreations.com | Hill Web Creations on LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=22161273&authType=name&authToken=NBrD&invAcpt=218672614_I176303754_215&trk=eml-comm_invm-b-profile-newinvite&fromEmail=&ut=2B3u0P9-t-NRQ1>
| Hill Web Creations <http://www.hillwebcreations.com/>
…On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 9:53 AM Denver Prophit Jr. ***@***.***> wrote:
I do also @EricAxel <https://github.com/EricAxel> it would make it easier
for my purposes.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#915 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADZCYC5SSBOOV52H2CUNUDSGNX6BANCNFSM4BVZVLWA>
.
|
Reopening issue to capture the occupancy discussion |
Richard Wallis,
Given that COVID-19 is currently pushing the need for "Occupancy" - and
that the World Health Organization lists 15 similar pending
pandemic possibilities that could emerge, it may be more important
than ever.
Thanks for re-opening it.
Jeannie Hill
Hill Web Creations
Digital Marketing, Google Analytics, PPC & SEO Consultant | When you're
serious about marketing, you employ winning strategies.
Office 651.460.2496 <(651)%20460-2496> |Cell 651.206.2410
<(651)%20206-2410>
jeannie@hillwebcreations.com | Hill Web Creations on LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=22161273&authType=name&authToken=NBrD&invAcpt=218672614_I176303754_215&trk=eml-comm_invm-b-profile-newinvite&fromEmail=&ut=2B3u0P9-t-NRQ1>
| Hill Web Creations <http://www.hillwebcreations.com/>
…On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:44 AM Richard Wallis ***@***.***> wrote:
Reopened #915 <#915>.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#915 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADZCYC3P3HCB7FBODYOPQ3SGN557ANCNFSM4BVZVLWA>
.
|
This issue is being tagged as Stale due to inactivity. |
We need a vocabulary for expressing hotel information, namely about the lodging business, room categories, and rates.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: