Re: Redefine and reuse? from Dan Brickley on 2013-07-23 (public-vocabs@w3.org from July 2013)

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:35:45 +0200
To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
Cc: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFoz_1JAMmbsVWoPuTX2VCYbe03B-BnZgJQS-4NNVWQcXA@mail.gmail.com>

On 23 July 2013 16:30, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Actually, Dan, the BibExtend group is quite torn about FRBR-like models,
>> with a good part of the group (perhaps the majority) opposed to introducing
>> the concepts into schema.org.
>
>
> Just for the record, I would be OPPOSED to FRBR-like models introduced into
> schema.org  (It would defeat our goals and original intent concerning
> simplicity for the developer, a bit)

I would too, FWIW. But I would like to see better advice on how to
describe the same kinds of scenario with flatter models.

Dan

Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2013 14:36:13 UTC