- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:07:42 -0700
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: public-json-ld-wg@w3.org
I’m certainly fine with tweaking the statements on the 1.0 specs, if we can. I believe the thought was that, as the 1.1 specs include everything from 1.0, that they were current, but that shouldn’t imply that the 1.0 specs are inappropriate to cite. Gregg Kellogg Sent from my iPad > On Apr 26, 2021, at 11:58 AM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: > > On 4/26/21 2:40 PM, Dan Brickley wrote: >> My main concern here is with the ability to document Schema.org by saying >> "For use in search engines, Schema.org can be written in JSON-LD 1.0" and >> having something reliable to point to. Maybe sometime it'll be possible to >> say that about 1.1 too. Should we be looking at requesting the superseded >> status to be restored, or could the popup warning shown on rescinded >> specifications be made less pushy and upselly? > > For what it's worth, I agree with Dan and share his concerns regarding > messaging to his community of interest. > > Perhaps a sticky footer, placed at the bottom of the page, in green/orange, > that says: "There is a newer version of this specification. For the latest > version please look at: ..."? > > -- manu > > -- > Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/ > Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. > blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches > https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches > >
Received on Monday, 26 April 2021 23:08:58 UTC