Start of Tennis Representation

[Jennifer Cooper]

I took a look at the data on BBC Tennis pages and ESPN pages to get a sense of the data. From there, I took out some major concepts. I used the recipe example on schema.org to think about how this might fit in with the rest of schema.org.

 

I hope this is in a somewhat understandable format :)

 

 Definitions:
TennisPlayers: The collection of all amatuer and professional tennis players.

TennisForm: The types of tennis. The type of tennis played determines the number of players and the number of sets played in a TennisMatch.

TennisMatch: The collection of all tennis matches. Tennis tournaments are organized into matches, which are composed of points, games, and sets. Typically, matches are either a best of three or best of five sets.

box_score: Property relating a SportCompetition to the competitor and breakdown of score according to the game segments. Game segments vary according to the type of sport played. For example, in tennis, the box score on a TennisMatch is broken down according to sets played in a match. For a baseball game, game segments are the innings.

 

Notes:

I indicated the term type, and properties are under the class that will be the rdfs:domain, and rdfs:range is in []. Nested triples denoted by {}.

 

Representation:

Class: TennisPlayers
       property: current_rank {rank_set
           property: rank_set_rank [Number]
           property: rank_set_date [Date]
          }
       property: highest_rank  {rank_set
           property: rank_set_rank [Number]
           property: rank_set_date [Date]
          }
       property: career_wins [Number]
       property: career_losses [Number]
       property: career_titles [Text]

 

Class: TennisForm
      SubClass: SinglesTennis
              SubClass: MensSingles
              SubClass: WomensSingles
      SubClass: DoublesTennis       
              SubClass: MensDoubles
              SubClass: WomensDoubles
              SubClass: MixedDoubles

 

Class: TennisMatch
       property: competitor [Player or "Team"]

       property: box_score {box_score_set
        property: competitor [Competitor]
          {game_segment
                   property: game_segment_number [Number]
                   property: points_for_segment [Number]
          }
       {

       property: game_type [TennisForm]

 

Class: TennisTournaments
       SubClass: GrandSlamTournaments
             SubClass: AustralianOpen-Tennis
      SubClass: FrenchOpen-Tennis
      SubClass: Wimbledon
      SubClass: USOpen-Tennis

 

Class: Tennis Tours
       SubClass: ATP World Tour
       SubClass: WTA Tour

 

Class: SportsOrganizations
        isa: Association of Tennis Professionals
        isa: Women's Tennis Association
        Class: Governing Bodies
          isa: International Tennis Federation

[Tom Grahame]

Jennifer,

This is great - thank you! I can see both general Sport and Tennis specific vocabulary here, I'll attempt to summarise what I see:

TennisPlayers - I think this could be a sportingRole of a schema.org/Person. We could have SoccerPlayer, F1Driver.

The 'rank' properties appear to be Tennis specific. Is this true?

The 'career' properties appear to be generic, so we could attach them to any sportingRole instance of a schema.org/Person

TennisForm could be more generic - SportsEventForm

But we could keep SinglesTennis, DoublesTennis and extend with more Sport specific subClasses - e.g SoccerFriendly

TennisMatch - do we need this, if we have SportsEvent?

All properties under this seem generic to me - competitor would suit universally I think.

TennisTournaments - I think this would be problematic as it stands. We would have to create classes for the myriad and many Sports Tournaments out there. There should be a general way to classify these - in the Sport Ontology we have RecurringCompetition.

TennisTours is interesting  - the notion of a tour I think falls under RecurringCompetition but may be a distinct notion, I believe Golf also has tours - do we know what defines a Tour?

SportsOrganizations - I agree we need a class of these.

My main concern for the group at this stage however is the proposition of sportingRole or similar property/mechanism for roles. It is very easy to describe someone as a particular type of sports person, e.g a Baseball Player, but I strongly feel this would be the wrong thing to do. Some athletes move distinctly between Sports, as in Sarah Storey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Storey.

Even if that is a rare occurrence, more frequently athletes do move between disciplines, for example Rugby players moving between League and Union.

And although we are tasked with looking at Sport specifically, I think we would be remiss not to consider what happens when we need to describe a person on the web in another context and any markup that we propose should not inhibit such scenarios. People often stop becoming athletes and go on to become personalities, politicians etc.

Regards,

Tom

--
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.

[Vicki Tardif Holland]

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 7:02 AM, Tom Grahame <tfgr...@gmail.com> wrote:

The 'rank' properties appear to be Tennis specific. Is this true?

Other sports have rank (for example, golf, alpine skiing, NASCAR racing). I am sure there are others.

 

TennisMatch - do we need this, if we have SportsEvent?

All properties under this seem generic to me - competitor would suit universally I think.

I agree. Otherwise, we get a lot of redundant subtypes for games and matches.

 

TennisTours is interesting  - the notion of a tour I think falls under RecurringCompetition but may be a distinct notion, I believe Golf also has tours - do we know what defines a Tour?

For golf, the association creates the tour based on geography and competitor status (e.g. men's tour, women's tour, seniors' tour, and amateur tour).

 

My main concern for the group at this stage however is the proposition of sportingRole or similar property/mechanism for roles. It is very easy to describe someone as a particular type of sports person, e.g a Baseball Player, but I strongly feel this would be the wrong thing to do. Some athletes move distinctly between Sports, as in Sarah Storey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Storey.

The rest of schema.org does not subclass Person. For example, there is no Actor type. We could replace SportsPerson with Person. It would mean inferring the sport and role from the context of where the Person is referenced, in the same way that they only way you can determine someone is an Actor is that he/she is referred to by the Movie > actor property.

Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vta...@google.com 

 

[Jason Johnson]

 

TennisTours is interesting  - the notion of a tour I think falls under RecurringCompetition but may be a distinct notion, I believe Golf also has tours - do we know what defines a Tour?

For golf, the association creates the tour based on geography and competitor status (e.g. men's tour, women's tour, seniors' tour, and amateur tour).

 

check out the Wikipedia description:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_golf_tours

 

"Professional golf tours are the means by which otherwise unconnected professional golf tournaments are organised into a regular schedule. There are separate tours for men and women, with each tour being based in a specific geographical region, although some of their tournaments may be held in other parts of the world." 

 

 

[Jason Johnson]

Jennifer - would you be willing to take this one step further and apply these types and properties against some real examples on the web that describe tennis entities?  Ideally we have an example that utilizes each type.  This would help us understand any gaps and how alternatives like 'Person' instead of 'TennisPlayer' would work.

[Jennifer Cooper]

Sure, unless this has been superseded by our current vertical push?

(Apologies for the late reply)