W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Project vocabulary

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:52:20 +0100
Message-ID: <CAM=Pv=Tau8HvwdJ_Ztxa=F4UEntZ3KQgdvWuvm8EZyg_3Nnu8Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
On 27 February 2012 11:07, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> Interesting :) Can you give some examples of relatively mainstream /
> popular / sizable sites that already expose pretty much this
> information in public HTML pages, i.e. that would be good candidates
> for adopting such markup extensions?

I'm not current with what people are using, and a search for "online
project management" is overwhelming (most results seem to be for
software projects, but I would hope a vocab would be more generic).
I'll ask around. But in the meantime here's a couple of examples:

Here's a ticket from Trac:
- there are various pieces of info exposed that correspond to the
terms I listed.
Most are direct synonyms, some a little more removed: their Component
corresponds with my Goal (the mapping which I think could be dealt
with through annotation somewhere). The Ticket itself relates to Task
in a similar way to vCard-Person, a generic 'description' term might
be needed for intermediation.

I've heard a lot of reference to Basecamp which is payware (most of
which seems to be a social net kind of thing), but their intro has
revealing screenshots, e.g.
- ToDo items assigned to people, which corresponds to Task hasAgent Agent

Slightly tangentially, they also have a load of datetime-related
properties similar to those I listed but are associated with Events. I
had a look at schema.org's Event, right now it's not very amenable to
reuse as it's focused on events like sporting events or gigs,
effectively Event+Place. An issue for another thread maybe, but I
think Event would be more useful generalized a little more (even in
the context of real-world events it's a bit clunky to have place in
there - the place might be "online").

> That's a fairly generic answer, but I think a useful step for anyone
> thinking about schema.org extensions. There are so many directions in
> which we could grow this thing, so a natural filter is "would new
> vocab help publishers annotate existing content, or does it require
> new content too?".

Right, that makes sense. Similar to microformats.org's "pave the
cowpaths", except perhaps more like establishing a rail link.



http://webbeep.it  - text to tones and back again
Received on Monday, 27 February 2012 11:52:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:22 UTC