- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:57:24 +0100
- To: Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>
- Cc: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>, Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com>, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, "schema.org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
On 16 September 2015 at 18:19, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com> wrote: > I also realize that I somehow closed my own pull request to add > locationCreated instead of merging it into sdo-ganymede. Unless folks > object, I'll resubmit for sdo-phobos. Thanks for the catching that. https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/323 has a lot of discussion support so let's get it finalized. If messing around retargetting the pull request is a pain I can copy/paste it from https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/pull/624/files easily enough - just let me know. As always an example would be great if anyone cares to sketch something in #323 I see https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/249 was closed in favour of #323, but are there any conclusions to draw about contentLocation - can we clarify its meaning? You wrote "I've been looking at uses of contentLocation and authors use it for either the location of the item or where the item was created, depending on the author's needs and interpretation of the vague description." Since we're adding locationCreated, that suggests we can clarify contentLocation to indicate where something actually is, at least for physical books, artworks etc. Is that fair? Dan > - Vicki > > Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vtardif@google.com > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:30 AM, Richard Wallis > <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote: >> >> wordCount: +1 >> >> #764 - discussion evolving on issue - I've just proposed an offeredBy >> property for Offer >> >> #445 - I lean towards, at this stage, starting with a simplistic >> (ExhibitionEvent) that can be built upon over time, and also a simple >> super-property for workPerformed, workPresented, (such as workFeatured ?) >> with its sub properties being added to the relevant Event subtypes. >> >> >> >> Richard Wallis >> Founder, Data Liberate >> http://dataliberate.com >> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis >> Twitter: @rjw >> >> On 15 September 2015 at 20:45, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 15 September 2015 at 20:34, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Adding wordCount to Book (or even CreativeWork) seems like an easy one. >>> > (https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/622) >>> > >>> > Some discussions seem to have simply died after the initial question >>> > was >>> > answered. We should come up with a policy for closing these issues >>> > after >>> > they have been dormant for some period of time. >>> >>> Yes - issues that get closed generally have someone championing them. >>> We have a lot of plates spinning... Often (as below) there are a few >>> rough edges that need final attention, rather than a complete polished >>> yes-or-no design. We might do well to break out sub-issues in such >>> situations, rather than have a single gigantic issue thread. >>> >>> I like the idea of adding wordCount. >>> >>> Another bibliographic one: >>> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/764 - this is an idea >>> for making it possible to describe not-for-profit offers such as >>> library holdings / lending, without needing to phrase it as a >>> 'seller'. Martin Hepp, Dan Scott, everyone - any views on this? >>> >>> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/445 on adding >>> ExhibitionEvent was looking promising - but there are a few details, >>> e.g. how to link the works in an exhibition. We already have >>> workPerformed (for music), workPresented (for movies at a >>> ScreeningEvent) - can we generalise this to featuredEvent (an Event >>> and the CreativeWorks(s) it features), rather than adding yet another >>> specific case e.g. workExhibited? >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> > - Vicki >>> > >>> > >>> > Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vtardif@google.com >>> > >>> > >>> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Schema.org CG, >>> >> >>> >> Our last release was just over a month ago, >>> >> http://schema.org/docs/releases.html#v2.1 >>> >> >>> >> It would be great to wrap up another release in the next week or two. >>> >> >>> >> There is a draft based on the Github sdo-phobos branch available for >>> >> review at >>> >> >>> >> http://sdo-phobos.appspot.com/docs/releases.html#sdo-phobos >>> >> >>> >> Please take a look at what's there, but also at any other open issues >>> >> that are reaching something approximating consensus and might be easy >>> >> to finalize and include without a huge amount more discussion. As >>> >> always the open issues list is at >>> >> http://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues ... >>> >> >>> >> cheers, >>> >> >>> >> Dan >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2015 17:57:54 UTC