Re: ISSUE-17: schema.org has NGO, EducationalOrganization, SportsTeam, GovernmentOrganization but not Labo[u]r Union

On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> Kendall,
>
> I recorded this issue last year after you pointed out that schema.org
> has various organizational types, but nothing for the class of things
> that are 'Labour Unions'. This is a flaw I'd like to fix.
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/17
> https://twitter.com/kendall/status/210422142620286976
>
> I come from an English speaking country where people say "trade union"
> rather than "labo[u]r union"; I don't have a good intuition for how
> odd "trade union" might sound elsewhere.


Trade union is used most often on the Web, according to Google.

It's not the usual term in the US, but people (who care) certainly know
what it means.

However, if schema.org prefers US English, then "labor union" seems the
obvious choice. It's by far the dominant form in the US. (Not that I think
that's a good reason to choose it; but I don't set the rules Schema.org
plays by, etc.)


> Do you (or others here) have
> any thoughts or preferences on a good and intuitive name for this
> concept? Schema.org uses US English when a choice is needed, but it's
> good to aim at terms that are the same in as many variants of English
> as possible.
>

Other possibilities:

"workers union" or just "union".


> I'm not sure if there are subtle substantive differences between
> 'labor union' and 'trade union'.
>

Only geographic, IMO. They refer to the same concept (in some general,
family resemblance kind of way, of course).


> Would "Trade Union" be workable to US-English ears? I have a mild
> preference for it because it avoids the word "labor"/"labour", which
> has two spellings.
>

Workable in that people know what it means? Yes.

But it would seem kind of oddball if, generally, Schema.org prefers US
English.

I think given all the context, "Union" is a fine choice.

Cheers,
Kendall