draft proposal

[Jason Johnson]

Hi All,

I was able to finally finish the first draft of our combined proposal for a sports extension.  I would appreciate it if folks would take the time to review and comment, or simply reply to this thread with any feedback they have.  This is hopefully the last step in our work stream and the culmination of our efforts so let's make sure it kicks butt.

Thank you!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a6OlIrUxv8jpRy-E4ueQ3eAQn-Lz7EguDAcjzn1WfoU/edit#

-J

[Dan Brickley]

On 24 January 2014 04:37, Jason Johnson <jasjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I was able to finally finish the first draft of our combined proposal for a
> sports extension. I would appreciate it if folks would take the time to
> review and comment, or simply reply to this thread with any feedback they
> have. This is hopefully the last step in our work stream and the
> culmination of our efforts so let's make sure it kicks butt.
>
> Thank you!

Thanks Jason & co :)

Do you think this is ready to circulate to the general
public...@w3.org web schemas list for review?

There might be fewer sports info specialists there, but perhaps some
sports lovers at least...

Dan

> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a6OlIrUxv8jpRy-E4ueQ3eAQn-Lz7EguDAcjzn1WfoU/edit#
>
>
> -J
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sports-schema-collab" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to sports-schema-co...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Jason Johnson (BING)]

Let's do it. Do we want to make a quick post this on the w3c site and add this PDF version?

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "sports-schema-collab" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sports-schema-collab/EY8MsDtoCOg/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to sports-schema-co...@googlegroups.com.

[Dan Brickley]

On 29 January 2014 19:20, Jason Johnson (BING) <jas...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Let's do it. Do we want to make a quick post this on the w3c site and add this PDF version?

Yes, could you generate a PDF and upload it to the webschemas Wiki,
and then update the proposals section of
https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Sports (stick a date on it as those
pages go stale so easily, it helps to know when things were posted).
After that a quick note to public...@w3.org should do the trick.
If we want a wider audience to review, then blogging on
blog.schema.org is also an option.

cheers,

Dan

[Dan Scott]

Hi Jason:

Here are some quick thoughts on a first pass of the draft proposal...

o ResultType - will need a Draw or Tie enumeration
o CompetitionResult for a SportsEvent - I was surprised to see that this does not include the score directly, but instead buries it one layer deeper under Statistics, split between each competitor; this seems like it would be unwieldy to mark up
o naming conventions - currently the proposal uses the statistics property / Statistics type approach in which the property and Type only differ by case, which is no longer considered a best practice in schema.org; the "hasXyZ" pattern seems to be the best option (per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Dec/0037.html)
o player has a range of Person - would it perhaps be better to either define a SportsPlayer type that encapsulates a Person as well as a playerRole[Text] property so that the types of players (quarterback, runningBack, etc) don't have to be defined in schema.org for every possible sport (or alternately have a range that is an external enumeration maintained by something outside of schema.org so that public-vocabs doesn't have to handle every extension for every sport)? That would also allow Statistics to be attached to SportsPlayer rather than to Person... Alternatively, SportsPlayer could be a subclass of Person if you wanted a flatter hierarchy of properties.

As I said, quick thoughts... take them for what they're worth :)

Thanks,

Dan

[Jason Johnson]

Argh!  Just seeing this now as I was about to re-post my 'new draft published' announcement from the public vocabs list to this DG.  Wishing I had waited as you make some valid points we should address.  Any chance you want to re-post your comment here to the public vocabs list and I will address it there?

Thanks Dan!