- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 12:12:08 +0100
- To: Dan Guo <dguo1113@stanford.edu>
- Cc: "schema. org Mailing List" <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 1 April 2016 11:12:37 UTC
Hi Dan, In this case I think the matter is much less one of convincing our Steering Group (see http://schema.org/docs/about.html) and much more about the wider community reviewing it for its technical implementation, spelling/typos and overlap / integration with the rest of schema.org. The bulk of the terminology is already in schema.org (might even be 20%+ of the classes) but by moving it to a topical extension we can evolve it further without it dominating People's core experience of schema.org. I think it likely we'll finalise it in near future - i.e. counted in days/weeks rather than months/years. But do please take a look for errors etc if you have time. Hope that helps, Dan On 1 Apr 2016 11:43, "Dan Guo" <dguo1113@stanford.edu> wrote: > To whom it may concern, > I am taking a look at the http://health-lifesci.webschemas.org/ schema, > which seems quite powerful and it appears to be in development. > > I am curious what the timeline is for this schema to get approved for > sponsorship by groups like Google, Yahoo!, etc.? As well, I am curious what > can be done with schemas that are only in development. > > Thanks for the support! > Cheers, > Dan Guo >
Received on Friday, 1 April 2016 11:12:37 UTC