W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Is vCard range restriction on org:siteAddress necessary?

From: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:03:12 +0000
To: William Waites <ww@styx.org>
Cc: Phil Archer <phil.archer@talis.com>, Linked Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1294149792.2537.123.camel@dave-desktop>
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 13:28 +0100, William Waites wrote: 
> * [2011-01-04 11:49:43 +0000] Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com> écrit:
> ] Is VCard that bad? It fits your example below just fine.
> The only problem I see with the example is that we don't have counties
> in Scotland, we have districts. In Quebec and Louisiana and other
> historically catholic places we have parishes. Is Scotland a "state"
> in the American sense, not really. You could use things like vc:county
> and vc:state and just say that the naming is bad, I guess.

Agreed, that's one reason not to make up another set of address terms
such as Phil's ex: examples.

The vcard terms (locality, region) strike me as reasonably neutral
whereas ex:county is not.

Received on Tuesday, 4 January 2011 14:07:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:11 UTC