Re: Agenda 22 August: claim sightings, identifying publishers

We'll make it possible at Schema.org. Whether publishers choose to exploit
that pattern is more for them to decide than a w3c Committee! That kind of
granularity is expensive but comes with benefits...

On Tue, 21 Aug 2018, 09:40 Jon Udell, <judell@hypothes.is> wrote:

> >  allowing and encouraging IDs on the schema.org/Claim type
>
> My impression, from the July F2F, was that IDs on claims was not going to
> be encouraged. So I'd be interested in exploring pros and cons.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>
>> Last we spoke, you thought the idea we're moving towards at schema.org,
>> allowing and encouraging IDs on the schema.org/Claim type. At the time
>> you said this was a bad idea. Could you articulate your thoughts here in
>> writing for the record? This design addresses scenarios including sites
>> like Snopes that want some but not all of their data public, but joinable
>> with info shared through other channels. Also cases such as translation of
>> verbatim and paraphrased claim text without mixing up which of those it is.
>>
>> On Tue, 21 Aug 2018, 09:22 Sandro Hawke, <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Meeting as usual tomorrow: https://credweb.org/agenda/20180822
>>>
>>> Two general discussion/brainstorming topics, continuing with two of the
>>> more promising recent threads:
>>>
>>> * Creating an ecosystem of claim sightings (Area 2)
>>>
>>> * Creating an ecosystem of securely identified publishers (Area 3 + 4)
>>>
>>> Also, a question for anyone reading this who doesn't usually attend
>>> meetings: would you be interested in having a video recording of the
>>> meeting available?  It would be a bit like a long-form podcast, I
>>> suppose.
>>>
>>> See y'all tomorrow,
>>>
>>>      -- Sandro
>>>
>>>
>>>
>