- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:25:58 +0000
- To: Guha <guha@google.com>
- Cc: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Shawn Simister <simister@google.com>, elf Pavlik <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 29 January 2014 19:04, Guha <guha@google.com> wrote: > We are close enough to covering FAQs that I would like us to. > > What are we missing? I think the main thing we do is not exclude them. Classic Internet-style FAQs still exist, even if the trend is towards more social QA sites where answers are attributed, more dynamic etc. So - Question is currently defined as "A detailed question that a user is seeking an answer from a community of experts." (test site http://sdo-wip1.appspot.com/Question) How about "A detailed question, for example one specifically being asked in a community site, or noted as a Frequently Asked Question (FAQ)" For Answer we have "An answer to a question." which is fine. Most of the others in https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/file/7befd20efb66/schema.org/ext/QA.html that assume QA community sites could simply be omitted for an FAQ document. For those who want to poke around the FAQ universe a bit more, see nearby FAQ utilities: faq-o-matic, http://faqomatic.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/1.html makefaq, http://www.lodestar2.com/software/makefaq/ phpmyfaq, http://www.phpmyfaq.de/ and of course Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAQ Dan
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 19:26:28 UTC