- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 18:46:59 +0200
- To: <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
On 8/1/13 6:41 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: > > > On 8/1/13 9:25 AM, Antoine Isaac wrote: > >> >> In the end what we submit to schema.org could be a dual proposal: we >> list 'element requirement' and for each of them we indicate what would >> be needed, either for re-use existing elements (and thus generalize >> their definition) or add new ones. >> > > Thanks, Antoine, that's what I was thinking as well. It would probably not be an actual proposal, like our others, but more of a "preview" to see how the community responds to the options. > > Could we do this with what we have already? I think that would mean adding Dan's proposal to our Holdings page. It would be nice to show the two side-by-side -- a kind of comparison table. > I believe that with a bit a clean-up it is possible. It would have to focus on the gist of the proposal... Antoine
Received on Thursday, 1 August 2013 16:47:29 UTC