- From: Jacob via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 21:39:05 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
My question is what are the implications for the DC community? This won't be interpreted as some kind of no-confidence vote in DC, will it? There are a lot of stakeholders; it might make sense to be agnostic and note that we have no preference which vocab gets used as long as some form of entity format typing, etc. is used. I know that's a complicating factor since body content would have to be checked if its dc:text or the schema equivalent but we're already checking for content type anyway so... in for a penny, in for a pound? Since the clients have to know what to do with the content anyway; it seems like this could be left to local developers to decide. _____________________________________________________ Jacob Jett Research Assistant Center for Informatics Research in Science and Scholarship The Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 501 E. Daniel Street, MC-493, Champaign, IL 61820-6211 USA (217) 244-2164 jjett2@illinois.edu On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 3:47 PM, fhirsch <notifications@github.com> wrote: > I think we need a concrete proposal and agreement with the schema.org > community to progress this approach. > > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_w3c_web-2Dannotation_issues_53-23issuecomment-2D119726739&d=AwMCaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=npggDwlZ6PziBzPBZthSo0f8iGOgRMf9ulO6o4WwfiA&m=HBy2v_Ghef5geKtSq2BZB3AwcLn5s-HcifozO_RFibQ&s=pbk7EWl0EsTuFeM36_bi3Vfc7VNe39hBT5CeYcFwssc&e=> > . > -- GitHub Notif of comment by jjett See https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/53#issuecomment-119739234
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2015 21:39:07 UTC