Re: Suggestion/question for improving datePublished example schema.org

There is indeed a fairly detailed discussion of the <time> tag and datetime
attribute on schema.org:
http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#advanced_dates

But as you point out Willem-Siebe, the examples use <meta> (I raised this
exact same issue over a year ago -
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2012May/0040.html.)

So I would agree that examples be aligned with the advice to use
<time>/datetime - but as per my earlier message, it would be instructive to
know when <meta> would be more appropriate than <time>, and vice versa
(though as in both cases the expected type is date in ISO 8601 date format,
so I don't understand why <time> serves to "make dates unambiguous" for
actual date values).


On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Willem-Siebe Spoelstra <
wsspoelstra@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I posted a question about this topic here a while ago:
> https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/webmasters/Xm5l4KFP9yg/vFZ5wIzGx6IJ (with
> no reply/anwer).
>
> On schema.org I find this example:
>
> <meta itemprop="datePublished" content="2011-04-01">April 1, 2011
>
> However, on w3.org I learn this:
>
>
> <*time* *itemprop="datePublished"* *datetime="2009-08-30"*>yesterday</time>
>
>
> I do think myself the last one is more appropriate HTML. Is it an idea to
> put this to the list for improving the example on schema.org?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Willem-Siebe Spoelstra
>