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

Re: offeredBy to supersede vendor, merchant, provider, seller, …?

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 11:43:03 +0100
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=6gFSE3m9XqqfuCJW+M8G+3Q3WhPSucC0z-FTJzzkWt5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com>, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Cc: "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 30 May 2014 10:56, Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com> wrote:
> I know that the proposal for modification of MedicalEntity now also suggests
> @careProvider, yet another variant. Now during the discussion about that
> proposal I suggested to reuse @provider, because of more or less the same
> reasons Chaals indicates.
>
> So I'm  for @offeredBy.
>
> I do wonder though if there are any consequences for @seller and @provider.
> If I understand it right those came with Goodrelations and would like to
> know if @offeredBy could cause any conflict there.

Thanks. I had a brief exchange with Martin Hepp yesterday - he has
some concerns that we maintain some of the conceptual distinctions
underlying Good Relations, will go into more detail next week. The
basic concern was to maintain the notion that "an offer is the promise
to transfer some rights on something", and that if we use the word
"offer", that's what it should continue to mean.

Dan
Received on Friday, 30 May 2014 10:43:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:41 UTC