- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:53:49 -0700
- To: Dan Scott <denials@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
He's often called "DanBri", so we can use that. :-) kc On 8/1/13 9:47 AM, Dan Scott wrote: > 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" :) > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Thursday, 1 August 2013 16:54:20 UTC