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

Re: Comment versus UserComments

From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 16:32:07 +0000
Cc: Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com>, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, public-vocabs@w3.org
Message-Id: <BBC81E97-C404-4F01-A776-13B31E6771BC@deri.org>
To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>

+1 

Cheers,
	   Michael

--
Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel.: +353 91 495730
WebID: http://sw-app.org/mic.xhtml#i

On 8 Mar 2012, at 16:29, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:

> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 8 Mar 2012, at 16:22, Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com> wrote:
> 
>> I like text also. Sounds we're very close to agreement.
>> 
> Likewise x2. Unless someone can think of a showstopping reason why not, I'll update the wiki proposal and proceed with this design...
> 
> +1 for text. generic enough to capture all the variants. I wonder if other types like Article and Review should be aligned to use that generic property, that can be dealt with later.
> 
> I also think this new property should be of type 'text' and not Thing, as I'm not sure Thing can just be a blurb of text.
> 
> Steph.
>  
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 8, 2012 5:22 AM, "Thad Guidry" <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com> wrote:
>> Good points.  Pointing to Thing for a text value seems inconvenient, but maybe shortening contentText to "text" (rather than "content") would be the most clear and parallel, so: CreativeWork/audio, CreativeWork/video and CreativeWork/text?
>> 
>> -jason
>> 
>> 
>> +1 to Jason's idea.
>> 
>> If you think about all the possible ways that humans can express themselves or their feelings... Doing it that way would cover the 3 basic forms of human expression.  But unfortunately the 4th one, "art" itself is missing a high level placement under CreativeWork/ as well... where Painting and Sculpture could be placed downstairs on the schema...but I guess that's ok.  And the 5th one, "gestures" (which would include Sign Language or simple Neanderthal hand poking) is interesting in itself if it ever appeared on the web. But those would probably take the video form)  By the way, Music as a human expression could be considered mapped under CreativeWork/audio.
>> 
>> CreativeWork/text  (I like it)
>> CreativeWork/audio
>> CreativeWork/video
>> CreativeWork/art
>> CreativeWork/gestures  (probably never needed, and not generally considered a CreativeWork but a communication form.)
>> 
>> -- 
>> -Thad
>> http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry
> 
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2012 16:32:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:49:00 GMT