- From: Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche <py.vandenbussche@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 21:34:27 +0000
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Cc: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, Sam Goto <goto@google.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+D1Oa=X42MaKRLJkFi6RK6F7Q0nMyDp3+Xxor_tY1E_vdzcVA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Dan, all, I'm experimenting in LOV a module to generate the documentation about modifications between two versions of a vocabulary. Currently it is only available for schema.org for testing. You can access the dif pages from the history timeline at the bottom of the page. http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/details/vocabulary_schema.html Here are the links for all official schema versions changes including the one in dev ;) v0.99 -> v1.0a http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_0.99-1.0a.html v1.0a -> v1.0b http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0a-1.0b.html v1.0b -> v1.0c http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0b-1.0c.html v1.0c -> v1.0d http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0c-1.0d.html v1.0d -> v1.0e(beta) http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/dif/dif_schema_1.0d-1.0e.html Hope this feature can help everyone to see its light through modifications of schema.org. Regards, Pierre-Yves. Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche. On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote: > +Cc: Sam > > On 26 November 2013 19:26, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote: > > I've reported these problems with the schema.org docs over the past few > > months, but they're still present in the latest 1.0d update. So I'll try > > to consolidate them and hopefully they can be dealt with in a single > > pass for 1.0e! > > Thanks for your persistence! > > > * http://schema.org/ItemAvailability - typo in "availablity": > > "A list of possible product availablity options." should be "A list > of > > possible product availability options." > > Will be fixed in 1.0e. > > > * http://schema.org/citation - invalid note in docs. The > > description says "NOTE: Candidate for promotion to ScholarlyArticle." > > when in fact the property was promoted from ScholarlyArticle to > > CreativeWork. > > ditto. > > > The same problematic note appears in every inline description of > > "citation" in CreativeWork and all of its children. > > ditto. > > > * http://www.schema.org/docs/schema_org_rdfa.html still has no encoding > > declaration in the <head> element or HTTP header. This can cause > > difficulties for parsers. > > Adding <meta charset="UTF-8" /> to head. > > > * "antagonym" still appears in the descriptions of > > http://schema.org/AcceptAction and other actions. This is being > > tracked at https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/24 but > > was missed in the 1.0d update. > > Deferring until next Actions update. Sam - can you track this? > > We have a 1.0e release about ready to go but waiting on some final > checks (and slowed down by US vacation). I've just added these tweaks. > > Here's a test build (which includes Accessibility and Order): > > http://sdopending.appspot.com/ItemAvailability > http://sdopending.appspot.com/CreativeWork > http://sdopending.appspot.com/citation > > also http://sdopending.appspot.com/docs/schema_org_rdfa.html > > How's that looking? > > Dan > >
Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2013 21:35:16 UTC