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

Re: (most likely) Version 1.0 of LRMI specification - proposed for inclusion with Schema.org

From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 22:22:00 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGR+nnHtKJsOtA32PK28JkWnr+LT+E686GM1X__A_DJ7sUrT+w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Grossmeier <greg@creativecommons.org>
Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Greg Grossmeier
<greg@creativecommons.org>wrote:

> <quote name="Adam Wood" date="2012-05-21" time="16:01:09 -0500">
> > As a former teacher, this gets me excited.
> >
> > Also, this:
> > useRightsUrl
>
> Just FYI: That term is a part of LRMI 1.0 but will not be included with
> Schema.org. Thus, we hope implementers of LRMI will use all LRMI terms
> (as appropriate) but we know Schema.org will not have that term on the
> Schema.org website.
>
> A similar term was discussed previously for the rNews specification
> inclusion.
>
> See:
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/schemaorg-discussion/ON9nhXNYRdU/discussion


I'm curious to know where the schema.org core team draws the line to decide
what property gets merged in or not. So far with rnews:usageTerms,
rnews:copyrightNotice
and lrmi:useRightsUrl, it seems to follow a usage/copyright/licensing
pattern. Is it because schema.org addresses this need through another
property maybe? or it's just too niche for schema.org?

Steph.


>
> Best,
>
> Greg
>
> --
> Greg Grossmeier
> Education Technology & Policy Coordinator
> twitter: @g_gerg / identi.ca: @greg / skype: greg.grossmeier
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 02:22:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:49:04 GMT