: Schema.org Residence lacks some specialisations After reviewing http://schema.org/Residence and the Specialisation under it, it seems that the wording is very west oriented. Especially in the sense

@Ann8826881

As far as I understand it, an ApartmentComplex does not represent a single apartment/condo, but the whole building consisting of several apartments/condos.

(In the same sense, GatedResidenceCommunity is for the whole community, not a single residence inside of that community.)

So if you want to represent a single apartment/condo, you should use Residence.

You could use other vocabularies (in addition) to specify more detailed types, e.g. Condominium from the Product Types Ontology.

Vote Up Vote Down

@Sarah324

The benefit of using specific is supposed to be the additional field attributed to them.

For a Condo, it might be 'safer' to use Residence or Place vs ApartmentComplex unless you specifically need an attribute that appears in ApartmentComplex and not in it's parents i.e. Place.

Place should cover most locations and since these two specific items in your example merely extend Place, they are in fact unnecessary. The only property that is entrenched in these item types is the containedIn field (which takes a Place), but neither have Residence nor ApartmentComplexspecific attributes.

Having super specific type is honestly one of the most short sighted and foolish things about schema.org. For your case, all three items are essentially the same as Place.

A good rule of thumb is to read the description of the schema item type and sees if it represents your item. If it accurately describes your thing, then use that. If not, defer to it's parent (et all, until you get to thing)

I assume The place where a person lives. describes your item well, therefore Residence is fine.

Vote Up Vote Down