Hey Thad, an 'activity' or 'activities' property would seem a bit broad to be me, and hard to properly define. Compared to the 'things to do' results on the search engines you mention, this would be very hard to replicate with a regular property on Wikidata. What is the criteria for a 'popular thing to do'? Number of yearly visitors? How many tourist guides include the attraction? And does this include restaurants as well? Parks? Something like 'boating' is very different from 'The Louvre'. I think this will be very much up for debate and Wikidata is not a proper platform for those discussions.
Fortunately we already have two other solutions that i think are a much better fit for the problems mentioned. You can already do a SPARQL query to find all attractions for a certain place, and even sort by criteria like number of visitors or sitelinks. And for more exhaustive lists Wikivoyage is a great project, and that can also connect to Wikidata (see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wikivoyage/Resources#Properties_for_listings) Kind regards, -- Hay On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 11:06 PM Thad Guidry <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Community! > > We are currently in discussions about possibly introducing a new property > that might simply be called "activity" or "activities" to hold the value of a > popular "things to do" that you typically see in search results when looking > around tourist attractions, parks, etc. > > The risk is that of large lands, administrative territories, or country being > abused, but this could be mitigated by disallowing that new property on those > broader kinds of instances where it doesn't make sense. I.E. a proposed > property would likely be much more specific to things that typically do have > activities as advertised or managed by governments through various amenities > or resources, such as "boating" because the government maintains a "boat > ramp" for public use, etc. And would not allow something like Switzerland > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q39 = "activity": "snow skiing" as an example. > > "activity" has a corollary with "amenity" which is different. "swimming" an > activity is not "swimming pool" an amenity. > > The discussion over this new property is likely to directly overlap with > OpenStreetMap and their properties and tags (some of which are enumerated), > where they have Tag:amenity=swimming pool (new tag is leisure:swimming pool) > as an example. Some activities are a sport, and others are not a sport. > > In Schema.org, we already have https://schema.org/TouristAttraction but > there's no property already made to hold "hasActivities" for example. (but we > could in the future if deemed useful) @Dan Brickley ? > > Also, a new property like "activity" or "has activities" would align quite > well to many search services such as Google, Bing, Yandex having similar > lookup services such as https://www.google.com/search?q=activities+near+me as > well as Government services such as https://www.recreation.gov like > https://www.recreation.gov/search?q=boating and several other European and > international lookup services. > > The initial discussion is here if you want to see some of the provenance and > work I've been doing: > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Protected_areas#Nature_preserve%2Freserve_and_annotating_%22free_public_access%2Fno_cost%22_and_%22things_to_do%22 > > Whew, too long, ok... Thoughts? > > Thad > https://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/ > https://calendly.com/thadguidry/ > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
