Fwd: [Fwd: Re: For review: Schema.org/Discussion]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: 14 June 2012 12:19
Subject: [Fwd: Re: For review: Schema.org/Discussion]
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>


fyi -> work begins on mapping schema.org and soic - which'd be nice

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: For review: Schema.org/Discussion
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 11:15:07 +0100
From: John Breslin <john.breslin@nuigalway.ie>
Reply-To: sioc-dev@googlegroups.com
To: <sioc-dev@googlegroups.com>,        <danbri@danbri.org>

Hey Dan, Stephane, all -

Thanks! Weąve been thinking along these lines too.

We are going to start a mapping document to see how to SIOC can be aligned
to schema.org, and it would be good to align with the Discussion / Q&A-type
ideas.

https://docs.google.com/**document/d/1xZpSXXI-**3TH7A2eTSyoy-F6xw-**
VBz25SmFdVtcSM<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xZpSXXI-3TH7A2eTSyoy-F6xw-VBz25SmFdVtcSM>
LcU

Sorry I missed this last week, was running a conference (ICWSM) but
recovering now :-)

John

On 02/06/2012 22:59, "Stéphane Corlosquet" <scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote:

 Danbri tried to send this to sioc-dev but his email bounced. see his
> message
> below.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 14:24:53 -0700
> Subject: Fwd: For review: Schema.org/Discussion
> From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
> To: sioc-dev@googlegroups.com
>
>
> Hello SIOC people,
>
> In public-vocabs@w3.org we ('schema.org <http://schema.org> ' we...) have
> started a thread
> about extending schema.org <http://schema.org> 's vocab in the area of
> discussions/forums.
> See mail from Charlie (copied below).
>
> Now would be a good time to think whether there is a "schema.org
> <http://schema.org>
> extensions based on SIOC" story worth exploring. Schema.org remains a
> single-namespace thing, so using SIOC (or e.g. FOAF, DC, etc.)
> directly isn't currently an option. However we've added big chunks of
> vocab from existing sources before (IPTC/rNews) and are working on
> doing it again (Good Relations). If SIOC-based additions, reconciled
> with existing schema.org <http://schema.org>  structures, were proposed,
> .. no
> promises but
> it might be good timing, especially if they could be merged in with
> the vocab mentioned below. Just thinking out loud...
>
> Dan
>
> ps. who'll be at SemTech SF this week? me, scor, ... others? ping me
> here or @danbri on twitter...
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Charlie Jiang <chjiang@microsoft.com>
> Date: 2 June 2012 09:36
> Subject: For review: Schema.org/Discussion
> To: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
>
>
>
>
> We've put forth a preliminary proposal for Shema.org/Discussion. It
> can be found at http://www.w3.org/wiki/**WebSchemas/DiscussionSchema<http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/DiscussionSchema>
> .
>
> This proposal is initially for supporting technical discussions.
> However, we do see the need to make it domain agnostic. We would love
> to have your feedback.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Charlie
>
>
--
John Breslin http://johnbreslin.org http://linkd.in/johnbreslin
Lecturer, Electronic Engineering, NUI Galway http://www.eee.nuigalway.ie
Researcher, Social Software and Semantic Web, DERI http://www.deri.ie
Winner, Seven-Year Most Influential Paper Award, ESWC
http://sioc-project.org
By popular request, my Lego welcome slides from ICWSM
http://slidesha.re/legoslides


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SIOC-Dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to sioc-dev@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sioc-dev+unsubscribe@**
googlegroups.com <sioc-dev%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
group/sioc-dev?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/sioc-dev?hl=en>.