W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > April 2014

Re: Schema.org site updates: Added RDFa and JSON-LD incoming properties

From: Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 15:32:59 +0000
To: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <935E87B5-05D3-4DF3-AAC7-0A3A93596D9A@oclc.org>
I just noticed that the stacking order of Types and their properties has been reversed.  i.e.. Thing is now at the bottom.

Confused at first - finding the Type [being viewed] specific properties at the top.

But already liking it.

~Richard

On 4 Apr 2014, at 15:59, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 03:16:32PM +0100, Dan Brickley wrote:
>> First up: I've just pushed a new version of the site with fixes for a)
>> missing acknowledgements b) proper titles c) the
>> supertypes/breadcrumbs problem.
>> 
>> Does http://schema.org/NewsArticle look better?
> 
> It certainly does! (Aside: this particular page needs an example, which
> would hopefully *ahem* show why headline/alternativeHeadline are
> needed in addition to name/alternateName and how they should be used,
> but the need for examples on this page predates the new version of the
> site...)
> 
>> There are a few more little things to fix asap but we wanted to cut
>> over to the new site asap to make releases easier...
> 
> One more thing I noticed: I'm currently getting a 404 for
> http://schema.org/docs/schema_org_rdfa.html (which is still linked from
> http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html).
> 
> Oh, and one more one more thing: while I appreciate that the
> single-line-of-HTML approach for the property tables saves a few
> transfer bytes, it would be a lot easier to diff versions if there were
> linefeeds for each <tr>. That said, if it doesn't happen we can always
> handle that on the client side :)
> 
> Related to the previous paragraph, trying to mirror the site so that I
> can check for significant changes with "wget --mirror" results in a lot
> of "405 method not allowed" errors. Again, these last two issues won't
> affect most people, so you can obviously consider them a very low
> priority :)
> 
> Thanks again, Dan!
> 
Received on Friday, 4 April 2014 15:33:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:39 UTC