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

Re: When to use UserComments rather than Comment class?

From: Jocelyn Fournier <jocelyn.fournier@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 09:16:08 +0200
Message-ID: <5360A338.6040107@gmail.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, George Gooding <george@nettsentrisk.no>
CC: W3C Vocabularies <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Le 17/03/2014 12:33, Dan Brickley a écrit :
> On 17 March 2014 11:28, George Gooding <george@nettsentrisk.no> wrote:
>> I tried to get peoples' attention about this issue quite a while ago:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Jan/0113.html
>> This part of schema.org is still broken. There is no valid way of marking up
>> comments to a blog post or article as of right now.
> The draft of our next release that I circulated last week
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2014Mar/0036.html
> addresses this as part of the changes to introduce a Question/Answer
> schema: See http://sdopending.appspot.com/comment ... so please just
> assume a 'comment' property can point to Comment now. These changes
> should be live in a matter of days.
> We are also working on improvements to the site that will make it
> clearer which old vocabulary is deprecated.
> Dan


Regarding deprecation and the meaning of UserComments (which is the 
event of creating the comment if I understand well), according to 
https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/32 & Dan comment on 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Nov/0196.html , we 
should finally use the newer http://schema.org/CommentAction type instead ?

I also see there's a new http://schema.org/QAPage type, but why not 
introducing a CommentPage type as well, which would contain all the 
comments related to a Creative Work ? (http://schema.org/discussionUrl 
would point to this kind of page most of the time)

E.g : 

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 07:16:38 UTC

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