RE: Periodical proposal

Another biased +1

From: Niklas Lindström [mailto:lindstream@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 9:34 AM
To: Dan Brickley
Cc: Karen Coyle; W3C Web Schemas Task Force
Subject: Re: Periodical proposal


On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com<mailto:danbri@google.com>> wrote:
On 7 April 2014 06:38, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
> There was a proposal for periodicals [1] that got a brief discussion on this
> list [2] but then disappeared. Does anyone know where this is in the overall
> scheme (or schema) of things?
I put up that test site a few weeks back, and revisited it ...
yesterday. I've made a new test version of the site using the new
schema.org<http://schema.org> codebase that we switched to last week. See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Apr/0051.html ->
http://sdo-culture-bundle.appspot.com/Periodical (I didn't add the
examples yet).

wiki: https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi-volume_Works
schema: https://github.com/dbs/schemabibex/blob/master/schema.org/ext/periodicals.html

I'd also like to move these things along. Original thread started
here, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Jan/0086.html

Are there any open problems with this design? Can I get some +1s from
people that believe adding it will be a useful improvement? (not
everyone here follows the bibextend list...)

+1

Cheers,
Niklas


cheers,

Dan

p.s. is the JSON-LD in
https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi-volume_Works#JSON-LD_.28experimental.29
ok? (it's marked as experimental)

> kc
>
>
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi-volume_Works
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Jan/0180.html
> --
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net<mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net> http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234<tel:1-510-435-8234>
> skype: kcoylenet
>