-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add support for Club (above the Team level) #193
Comments
Hi Renato, good to hear from you! We considered that in the early days but put it out of scope for 1.0. Maybe it's time to look at it now? @pauljkelly I think it would be fairly straightforward to add a class that sits above Team (or Agent)? Are there other use cases / scenarios that we need to consider apart from the straightforward example given above? |
When we consider club, then perhaps look at federation - or sport organisations in general ... and then you start digging into the rabbit hole. |
Thanks, but we already have GoverningBody to cover federations. We just need something to represent the wider Club which the Team is a part of. |
Perhaps add "Club" above "Team" and then link "Club" to "Governing Body" |
Hi @riannella we discussed this in our regular meeting and we had trouble finding the Man U Club per se (we looked at Barca too). There's no wikipedia page for it, just pages for the men's and women's teams (also referred to as clubs) which share an owner, Man U PLC. However, when we looked at Bayer Munich we found that more traditional club structure which you are likely referring to above. Do you have examples from other sports? We'd also be interested to know what use cases you are dealing with here. I think we can incorporate that into the model with no disruption since it would simply point from the team to the club (and back). But what do we make of the Man U structure? |
Hi all...if you look at the ManU wikipedia page: Here in Australia, the Brisbane Roar FC: In the Australian Rules Football, the Brisbane Lions: I think from a modelling perspective, this is an important part of sports "data". |
Another team that I've seen using a similar structure to what @riannella linked is Real Madrid. The football club started as only that, but then they added different divisions within their company structure for other sports. Main wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Madrid_CF with their departments And the basketball side of things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Madrid_Baloncesto You can find the other division links on the main wiki page. |
Thanks for these examples, they're a great help to focus our thinking. It's interesting that so many clubs have teams in wildly different sports... we also found that many German clubs have teams that participate in many sports, eg https://fcbayern.com/en/club/fcb-club/other-sports/chess ! Questions:
@freeballoon maybe you have some thoughts in this area? |
Not necessarily, but having start and end dates to track when a team was founded and dissolved would help. This can be done at the In the worlds of eSports this happens all the time. Most organizations have multiple teams, one for each videogame, and sometimes academy teams too in lower leagues. When an entire team gets sold, which happens pretty regularly, the roster and sometimes the staff is transferred from one org to another, not the Just last year an entire org was bought out (CLG), the old League of Legends team was disbanded and recreated under the new org of NRG. They would be considered 2 different An older example is Dignitas EU, which had to be sold due to regulations, and the same thing happened. The roster of the EU At some point in the future Fellow Esports became Splyce, which was just a rebranding. I believe this is the case when it will still be the same Here's an excerpt that showcases the wording being used when "moving" teams:
I am inclined to say both, if we see Clubs as Sport organization/businesses. My understanding is that I would also add |
Membership has start and end dates and could look after that. Name changes are something on our road map but would be handled differently, perhaps by some general identity management scheme. Franchise moves was something we took into consideration for the model. In terms of Athlete membership our scope is really results, as our overall use case is for news. But if we can get that association with Club at little cost then no worries. |
This is not uncommon. For instance. The club I belonged to – Stabæk IF – is a multisport club: That is how many Norwegian clubs are organized. Often the elite teams are being organized as separate organizations, still under ownership of the club. Without the club connection, they cannot participate in any Norwegian tournaments. Dumb question (and maybe late into the discussion), but would it be a better idea to have a general SportOrganization object where you type it? SportOrganization.type=club / GoverningBody / Team / EventOrganizer? (is Euro 2024 a sport organization?) Trond |
Hi, can you show an example (turtle) of what the new Club/Team Membership/Competition would look like? |
…es (#201) Moved "member" and "membershipOf" relationships to the parent Membership object so they work for both IndividualMembership and TeamMembership. This means that the range has been expanded to any Agent - Specific refinements for IndividualMembership and TeamMembership are made in the SHACL validation rules. Fixes #193 .
I was wondering if you can model a Club in the ontology?
For example, "Manchester United FC" (a Club) that has two Teams (ManU Men, and ManU Women) ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: