W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > December 2013

Re: Suggestion/question for improving datePublished example schema.org

From: Willem-Siebe Spoelstra <wsspoelstra@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 11:17:19 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPGOeDs-heByZrHsbDZbs6KVQMsW3RVBz2p0Nq_EWh=KxQ1XuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Hi Charles, great you agree with me on this, would be a good idea to add it.

Aaron, thanks for the schema.org link, they explain it there very well, so
I totally understand (since I actually have the same question) you posted
about that before. As far as I can see nobody replied to your mail, am I
I think it's good you made the question more specific when to use meta and
when to use time. However, I can not think of any example where I should
use meta, I think you can always use time...

Kind regards,

Willem-Siebe Spoelstra

2013/11/21 Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>

> There is indeed a fairly detailed discussion of the <time> tag and
> datetime attribute on schema.org:
> http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#advanced_dates
> But as you point out Willem-Siebe, the examples use <meta> (I raised this
> exact same issue over a year ago -
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2012May/0040.html.)
> So I would agree that examples be aligned with the advice to use
> <time>/datetime - but as per my earlier message, it would be instructive to
> know when <meta> would be more appropriate than <time>, and vice versa
> (though as in both cases the expected type is date in ISO 8601 date format,
> so I don't understand why <time> serves to "make dates unambiguous" for
> actual date values).
> On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Willem-Siebe Spoelstra <
> wsspoelstra@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I posted a question about this topic here a while ago:
>> https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/webmasters/Xm5l4KFP9yg/vFZ5wIzGx6IJ (with
>> no reply/anwer).
>> On schema.org I find this example:
>> <meta itemprop="datePublished" content="2011-04-01">April 1, 2011
>> However, on w3.org I learn this:
>> <*time* *itemprop="datePublished"* *datetime="2009-08-30"*>yesterday</time>
>> I do think myself the last one is more appropriate HTML. Is it an idea to
>> put this to the list for improving the example on schema.org?
>> Kind regards,
>> Willem-Siebe Spoelstra
Received on Monday, 23 December 2013 10:18:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:36 UTC