- From: Liddy Nevile <liddy@sunriseresearch.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:10:36 +1100
- To: Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@bell.net>
- Cc: "Martin Quiazon" <martinq@benetech.org>, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@google.com>, "Charles McCathie Nevile" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, <public-vocabs@w3.org>, <a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com>
There is a registry proposed in a project run by Gregg Vanderheiden et al but also, at ISO we are setting up a registry - the proposition has been for that to be the same as Gregg is talking about but it has not happened... I hope what we have for ISO is the same as the schema.org stuff in the end so would like to have a single registry, for sure.. Liddy ... On 19/11/2013, at 8:10 AM, Matt Garrish wrote: > Agree. The properties weren't conceived as a closed enumeration, and > defining in the schema.org domain doesn't seem appropriate. > > Wasn't the idea of a registry of values floated earlier in the > process? > > Matt > > -----Original Message----- From: Martin Quiazon > Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 3:50 PM > To: Dan Brickley ; Charles McCathie Nevile > Cc: Peter F. Patel-Schneider ; <public-vocabs@w3.org> ; a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: [a11y-metadata-project] Re: Accessibility for > schema.org Re: Updated Wiki to cover proposal > > I'm with Dan on this. In practice there are lots of existing values > and > the potential for many future values; it's not feasible to have a > fixed > enumeration that encompasses them all. > > On 11/18/13 12:47 PM, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@google.com> 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 >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups >> "Accessibility Metadata Project" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >> send an >> email to a11y-metadata-project+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to >> a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Accessibility Metadata Project" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to a11y-metadata-project+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Accessibility Metadata Project" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to a11y-metadata-project+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Received on Tuesday, 19 November 2013 00:11:30 UTC