Re: Proposal for Schema.org extension mechanism

I'm strongly -1 to any kind of normative AS2 dependency on schema.org, even
with the proposed extension model*. It's simply not necessary and would add
very little benefit. Using the two together is beneficial in some cases
that I can imagine but a normative dependency would add little to no
significant technical benefit right now. If you'd like to write up a note
describing a non-normative use of the two together, that would likely be
helpful.

* (I happen to be a fan of the proposed extension model, BTW)

- James
On Mar 1, 2015 6:12 AM, "☮ elf Pavlik ☮" <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
wrote:

> On 02/13/2015 10:34 PM, Guha wrote:
> > External Extensions
> >
> > Sometimes there might be a need for a third party (such as an app
> > developer) to create extensions specific to their application. For
> example,
> > Pinterest might want to extend the schema.org concept of ‘Sharing’ with
> > ‘Pinning’. In such a case, they can create schema.pinterest.com and put
> up
> > their extensions, specifying how it links with core schema.org. We will
> > refer to these as external extensions.
>
> Hello,
>
> In recent reply to an older private thread with James M Snell and me,
> Sam Goto linked to this proposal and suggested that we could use
> something like  *schema.activitystrea.ms* if we would want to use
> extended schema.org for Activity Streams 2.0
>
> In recent conversation on IRC #social, Harry Haplin said that as for
> today: "formal and normative dependencies on schema.org should not be
> part of W3C specs right now"
> http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-02-18/line/1424288449258
>
>
> I wonder if using something in w3.org namespace would resolve that
> issue? e.g. *http://www.w3.org/ns/schema*
>
>
> I also thought about https://w3id.org/schema but possibly it will also
> not satisfy requirements for W3C formal and normative dependencies.
>
> I also know that Credentials CG finds interest in aligning with
> schema.org vocabulary or even having it integrated as Reviewed Extension
> *
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2015Jan/0004.html
> It looks like it also makes sense for work in Web Payments CG
> * https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/134#issuecomment-56285057
>
> I believe that resolving issue of using schema.org in normative
> dependencies in W3C specifications will make work in various W3C groups,
> which need web vocabularies, much more straight forward.
>
> Social WG will have Face to Face meeting on March 17&18 at MIT, James M
> Snell - working on Activity Streams 2.0 Vocabulary, Tantek Çelik long
> time contributor to Microformats and one of Social WG chairs and many
> others will participate in it. I hope we can discuss this topic there
> and by then gather more feedback from W3C staff and schema.org leaders.
> * https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17
> * https://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/15
>
> Thank you all for giving some of you attention to this case!
>
>
>