Re: The Vocabulary, Schema.org governance, etc.

On 09/22/2014 06:03 PM, Guha wrote:
> I would prefer to not get into the issue of Google join the Social WG at
> this point.
> 
> Also, it doesn't make sense for me to come if I cannot participate in
> the discussion.
> 
> If you think it would be useful, and if you think TPAC rules are
> flexible enough to allow it, I would be happy to come and answer any
> questions the WG might have.
Hi Guha and Schema.org crew!

First of all I would like to express my apologies for putting out this
premature (informal) invitation! To my understanding group chairs have
possibility to allow exceptions, still yesterday during our weekly
teleconf many people objected it. You can find more details towards the
end of these IMO quite chaotic (and not approved yet) minutes
http://www.w3.org/2014/09/23-social-minutes.html

Due to constraints of practiced nowadays political bureaucracy, myself I
can't join TPAC in person, but I still will participate remotely and I
believe that some Social WG members present have interest in
coordinating our work with schema.org team. Right away I would like to
support possibility of scheduling Web Schemas session during TPAC!

I will write in near future separate message with an overview of my
evaluations of existing state of schema.org vocabulary in context of
Social WG work. I just started yesterday a github repository to collect
relevant examples and start gathering such feedback. Please feel free to
gh:watch it already ("schema:FollowAction" almost would work here ;) )
https://github.com/w3c-social/schema.org-examples/issues/1

I hope I didn't bring additional confusion to Schema.org <-> W3C Social
WG relationship.

With friendly greetings,
☮ elf Pavlik ☮

Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2014 10:54:32 UTC