- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 12:23:42 +0100
- To: Robert Schroeder <bobsc@charter.net>
- Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
On 9 May 2013 12:08, Robert Schroeder <bobsc@charter.net> wrote: > For enumerations it specifically says “use link with href”. I’m I missing something here? It's a natural tradeoff in such documentation. Sometimes it's better to pick an option rather than describe all the theoretical variations and possibilities. Other times its better to emphasise that webmasters and publishers have a free choice of equivalents, and describe those options. It's more an art than a science knowing which path to take. In this specific case I think the expectation was that a schema.org enumeration, like http://schema.org/Hardcover is a really boring page to visibly link to, hence the recommendation to use <link>. Using <a> would be harmless (if boring). Hence the high level summary "3b. Enumerations and canonical references: use link with href". However within the body of 3b as I read it, the message is that canonical references can be handled either with <a> or with <link>, and that publishers are free to choose. Perhaps we should make that more explicit. Also, subsequently we introduced the notion of 'external enumerations' (http://blog.schema.org/2012/05/schemaorg-markup-for-external-lists.html), which are non-schema.org pages e.g. links to Wikipedia, and hence potentially a bit more interesting for end users to visit. So the <a> scenario may be more appealing now... Dan
Received on Thursday, 9 May 2013 11:24:08 UTC