Re: Changes vs. new element

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> 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'm certainly willing to go ahead and do that; my email & examples can
be a bit hard to work through as is.

Aside: I wonder if we should refer to Dan Brickley as "Dan[prime]" and
to myself as "the other Dan" :)

Received on Thursday, 1 August 2013 16:48:26 UTC