Gitter chat about GoodRelations, Product|Service, Offer|Want, broader|narrower, facets and tags, etc
elf-pavlik 06:33
I just added link from GoodRelations to this useful comment https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/pull/821#issuecomment-146123021
bhaugen 06:40
@elf-pavlik - that whole thread is interesting, and confirms my perception that GR and schema.org offers etc are coming from the viewpoint of an ecommerce seller, and in general, schema.org is aimed at SEO.
elf-pavlik 11:37
It still works with similar concepts Agent, Resource(Product|Service), Listing(Offer|Demand) and how they all relate to each other. We have possibly more comfortable situation that not aiming at supporting Microdata we can avoid need to define inverse properties - https://github.com/mnot/I-D/issues/39#issuecomment-89789736
bhaugen 11:43
I'm not opposed to using GR or schema.org concepts just because they are aiming at a different set of use cases, but that does explain some of their incompatible differences (e.g. GR compensation). And I'll be really interested in how GR moves away from their commercial bias.
elf-pavlik 12:19
Agent, Resource(Product|Service), Listing(Offer|Demand) don't seem to me commerce specific, please keep in mind that one can safely ignore all the payment related properties and define various other ways to work with concerns around reciprocity
bhaugen 12:19
understood
Can mutual aid network or mutual credit offers and wants be posted and matched by (for example) faceted categories instead of an identified product or service?
Somewhat interesting to see the mix at https://tagboard.com/ImpactEconomy2015/246431 - a lot of mutual credit and mutual aid.
elf-pavlik 12:24
do you need faceted Offer/Demand types or Product/Service types? eg. food (Product)
or health care (Service)
more specific massage (Service)
bhaugen 12:25
We're working with mutual aid network and a couple of related mutual credit networks. All post offers and wants by categories.
elf-pavlik 12:25
I think we have conceptual mismatch here
bhaugen 12:25
Food is pretty easy to do with broader and narrower, as in AGROVOC.
elf-pavlik 12:25
Offer/Demand only work as QualifiedRelation (~Reification) of relationship between Agent and Resource
bhaugen 12:26
Is that the conceptual mismatch?
elf-pavlik 12:26
so in the end we want to support more genric faceted Product/Service (Resource)
bhaugen 12:26
yes
that's an issue on my mind.
NRP doesn't support it , either.
elf-pavlik 12:27
Agent - Offer -> Product | Service
bhaugen 12:27
We do have faceted categories, but they apply to identified resource types.
We could do a broader and narrower hierarchy of resource types pretty easily, which would work well for food.
elf-pavlik 12:27
Offer provides way to qualify act of offering something - Product/Service eg. generic health care with conditions for accessing it
bhaugen 12:28
got example of generic health care with conditions?
elf-pavlik 12:29
eg. for Agents participating in particular http://schema.org/ProgramMembership
Offer/Demand only qualifies relation between Agent and Product|Service
so we want to have broader and narrower for Product|Service not Offer|Demand
at lest if we talk about what we need/want
bhaugen 12:30
broader and narrower for Product|Service works for food
elf-pavlik 12:30
and not in what way we need/want it
bhaugen 12:31
and is easy to do
mutual networks use categories and tags
elf-pavlik 12:31
HealthCare narrower Massage ?
bhaugen 12:31
much more loosey goosey
HealthCare narrower Massage would work
elf-pavlik 12:31
categories of Products|Services and tags on them
not categories of Offers|Demands and tags on them
bhaugen 12:32
I think so
elf-pavlik 12:32
i like using schema.org (GoodRelations) as reference since it has clearly defined model
bhaugen 12:32
the mutual networks put themm on the offers and wants, but they probably belong to whatever it is they offer or want.
I like goodrelations, too.
elf-pavlik 12:33
what someone call Want other can call Product | Service, depending how one looks at it
bhaugen 12:33
My comments are not criticisms, just trying to analyze diffs.
their goals are not my goals
elf-pavlik 12:33
yeah, where mutual aid networks put conditions on access to service or transfer of product ?
bhaugen 12:33
they might, haven't gotten deep enuf yet
elf-pavlik 12:34
how to give different conditions for different people if you assign it on Product|Service level?
bhaugen 12:34
we're learning
geo conditions would apply
elf-pavlik 12:34
something relevant http://openfoodnetwork.org/platform/user-guide/advanced-features/variant-overrides/
bhaugen 12:34
possibly to offers and wants more than products or services
elf-pavlik 12:35
what kind of geo conditions ?
bhaugen 12:35
I want this in wisconsin rather than germany
for example
variant-overrides applies to prices
what you run into in food a lot is growing methods
organic, no pesticides, etc
grades
grade A, B, C
sizes
elf-pavlik 12:36
this applies to Product not Offer of it
bhaugen 12:36
correct
elf-pavlik 12:37
i also want Product which has certain qualities
bhaugen 12:37
I'm mostly thinking about Product/Service
want product with qualities is how the mutual networks do it
where product (or service) is often either very broad, refined in freeform text, maybe with tags
usually has a location
it's not clear to me yet whether the location should apply to the offer or want or the product or service
probably the offer or want
elf-pavlik 12:40
http://schema.org/availableAtOrFrom
bhaugen 12:41
yup
elf-pavlik 12:41
Used on these types
Demand
Offer
bhaugen 12:41
works for me
elf-pavlik 12:41
I don't say "we should use GR/schema.org" but I see benefit with understanding modeling used by it...
bhaugen 12:42
absolutely
elf-pavlik 12:42
And have pretty good documented reference we can use in our conversations
bhaugen 12:42
and I leave it to you and Lynn to decide if and when we shd use those vocabs
I'll follow
and kibitz
elf-pavlik 12:43
thanks! IMO we don't need to rush with that decision, and as long as we model things in not compatible way only if we have good reason for that, we should have easy time with converging some aspects of vf: vocab at some point
bhaugen 12:44
one more thing about offers and wants:
often they evolve from broader and more loosely defined to something that is an identified resource.
elf-pavlik 12:45
also broad want can receive many alternative matching narrower offers
bhaugen 12:45
Like, I want some land by a stream with some woods and open space. And then, I find this parcel with an address and boundaries.
yes
elf-pavlik 12:46
other way broad offer (i can code .js) narrow want (please help with this codebase)
bhaugen 12:46
yes, good example
elf-pavlik 12:46
shall we document this conversation somewhere?
bhaugen 12:47
save it into an issue seems to be the pattern.
elf-pavlik 12:47
since Transfer can stay independent from Exchange, IMO Offer and Want go into Process (or elsewhere)
usually between Agent and Resource
which matches Agent <-> Resource relationships
bhaugen 12:48
I think Offer and Want and Transfer and Exchange are all related.
Might not be an exchange, but exchange requires transfers
elf-pavlik 12:48
let's put it in valueflows for now
as glue concepts
bhaugen 12:48
ok with me
elf-pavlik 12:49
do you have some time / energy to draft a page based on this conversation?
bhaugen 12:50
I can copy and paste into a new issue in valueflows
elf-pavlik 12:50
i could iterate on it right after that (or we could do it the other way but we have dinner in few minutes)
bhaugen 12:50 go ahead and eat elf-pavlik 12:50 we close it after harvesting from it thanks @bhaugen ! bhaugen 12:50 I'll look around and see if there's already an issue that fits, otherwise start a new one