W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Consider adding schema.org to RDFa core default profile

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:04:16 +0200
Cc: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <30F04866-C261-48E3-847C-96744DD934A2@w3.org>
To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>

although this is a bit against the rules we have set up for the default profile, I believe the position of schema.org justifies it. I also agree with the 'schema' prefix.

I guess the right URI is http://schema.org/

Is there any objection in the group?



On Oct 21, 2011, at 08:39 , Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:

> Hi,
> Adding the schema.org namespace to the default profile would ease the deployment of schema.org in RDFa 1.1 when using CURIEs, so that authors don't have to worry about defining the namespace. schema.org might not compare to the other namespaces in terms of number of documents found in the wild, but it's bound to grow given the push from the search engines to get it deployed on the Web. Implementors will most likely hard code this prefix binding in their implementations anyways, so it might as well be standardized.
> 'schema' is a good prefix candidate (we use it in Drupal and I've seen people using it when writing RDFa snippets). While 's' is another option in line with the prefix 'v' of data-vocabulary.org, it is more cryptic. so I'd vote for schema:.
> Steph.

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Friday, 21 October 2011 08:02:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:53 UTC