Re: Actions in Schema.org

Laying out some side by side comparisons of the two models would be an
excellent start, as would having a clear side-by-side comparison of
the intended use cases, features and requirements. From there we can
see what alignment we can achieve.

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
> On 14 May 2013 18:40, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>> A few of us on the Learning Registry team have been considering harmonizing
>>>> our LR Paradata 1.0 spec (1) with Schema.org and the Actions proposal really
>>>> is a great step. The Paradata spec is an enhancement of ActivityStrea.ms (2)
>>>> primarily directed towards Educational Activities.
>>>[snip]
>>
>> Btw, FWIW, I am one of the editors for the activitystrea.ms specs.. I
>> know that there are a number of important differences between this
>> proposal and those specs and that the use cases for each are a bit
>> different, but I am certainly interested in making sure that there is
>> good alignment between this and what we've done in activitystrea.ms.
>
> Thanks! We still have some wiggle-room to bring things closer
> together. Our Actions draft is very much oriented towards fitting into
> the rest of the schema.org system but hopefully there are places where
> choices (like particular action/activity types) can be aligned with
> the work of the activitystrea.ms community. Maybe we could take a set
> of activitystrea.ms descriptions and check the extent to which they
> can be described via schema.org Actions?
>
> Dan

Received on Wednesday, 15 May 2013 01:50:03 UTC