Re: Accessibility for schema.org Re: Updated Wiki to cover proposal

+1

On Nov 18, 2013, at 9:47 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:

> On 18 November 2013 13:36, Charles McCathie Nevile
> <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:44:39 +0800, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>> <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> schema.org has enumerated types, which might be better to use than text
>>> with a list of expected strings.
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, that was what I was thinking... We should make that change.
> 
> I'm not so convinced yet. There are quite a lot of values, and given
> schema.org's flat namespace we would have to consider each term as
> _the_ schema.org use of that word.
> 
> e.g. MathML; sound; captions; latex; timing etc. would become
> http://schema.org/sound ...
> 
> My inclination (especially having seen the variety of views earlier in
> these discussions) is that allowing Text and also allowing values
> represented by URL might be the right combination. Schema.org's
> enumerations work best for short, rigid, fixed lists that won't evolve
> or get extended...
> 
> Dan
> 

--------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp 
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
=================================================================
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/

Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 20:59:09 UTC