- From: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 09:01:38 -0500
- To: phil.barker@hw.ac.uk
- Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 14:02:14 UTC
Back to the channel: Tightening up Schema.org descriptions and Types. I dunno. I'm a bit on the fence. I like the blended approached or the proposed and current, bottom-up approached. But that approach leaves assumptions to be made. I try to avoid assumptions typically, that's just how I am, but I understand that sometimes with a bottom-up approach it is the only way. Regardless, I would like to see more refined and constrained descriptions for Schema.org Types. On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk> wrote: > On 04/06/13 07:13, Dave Pawson wrote: > > Max was looking for a refinement (phone number to 'home phone number') > Is there any convention for doing this in schema.org? > > Extensions? http://schema.org/docs/extension.html > > Phil > > -- > work: http://people.pjjk.net/phil > twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/philbarker > > Ubuntu: not so much an operating system as a learning opportunity.http://xkcd.com/456/ > > -- -Thad http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 14:02:14 UTC