W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-socialweb@w3.org > October 2014

TPAC: Schema.org and Social WG ( legal / technical )

From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 01:27:07 +0200
Message-ID: <54483D4B.2070308@wwelves.org>
To: 'Social Web Working Group' <public-socialweb@w3.org>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, tantek@cs.stanford.edu
Hello,

I asked Sam Goto, who leads schema.org/Action development, if he would
like to join this Wednesday TPAC session[1]. He replied:

"I don't know yet ... if most people are interested in things like
licensing and legalises of schema.org, Guha is going and can represent
that a lot better than I.

If, however, there are folks that are interested in discussing the
technical/concrete merits of one approach over the other, than I think
it is a forum that I can contribute to constructively.

The last time I presented to this group there wasn't anything that I
could really respond to, so I'm unsure if I'll attend."


Since schema:Action and as:Activity have huge overlap [2], as well as
as:PotentialActionHandler and schema:EntryPoint. I think it would make a
lot of sense to take opportunity of meeting face to face to see
possibilities of coordinating our efforts.

James, currently I don't see you among people interested in
participating in this session. Would you consider discussing technical
aspects of ActivityStreams 2.0 and Schema.org/Action with Sam?

Tantek, maybe you could also bring experience with <indie-action>[3] to
the table?

I also added to session description links to
* http://activitystrea.ms/head/activity-schema.html#verbs
* http://activitystrea.ms/head/activity-schema.html#object-types

This topic I see on the border of techinical / political? discussion.
IMO having ActivityStreams, Schema.org and Microformats all defining
very similar concepts doesn't make live easier for people who implement
publishing and consuming of social data :(

Could we try to clarify interests for that meeting among Social WG
participants in next 2 days and then also have conversation over
public-vocabs?

I see combining legal / technical / hybrid topics somehow challenging ...

Cheers!

[1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2014/SessionIdeas#Schema.org_and_Social_WG
[2]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Vocabulary_Comparison#as:Activity_.7C.7C_schema:Action
[3] http://indiewebcamp.com/webactions
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2014 23:29:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:26:13 UTC