- From: Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 02:49:36 +0000
- To: vtardif@google.com, danbri@google.com
- Cc: gregg@greggkellogg.net, giurca@tu-cottbus.de, public-vocabs@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 7 August 2014 02:50:04 UTC
I suppose the backward-compatible way to do it would be to: - Create a new type (Collection?) - Change the domain of the structural properties of ItemList to Collection - Make ItemList inherit from Collection as well as CreativeWork That leaves ItemLiist as the editorial thing, so all existing markup would still be semantically unchanged. -jason On Wed Aug 06 2014 at 6:18:10 PM Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote: > >> I had a look into this last time you mentioned it. I agree that there >> is a need for something that's a pure data structure, and something >> else that carries the CreativeWork aspect. Are we OK with changing the >> meaning of ItemList out from under the feet of existing publishers? As >> far as I could see it was mostly used with Thing-properties, but there >> were some sites using 'about', 'author' properties. >> >> I'm quite liking the Role-like idiom. If we're going to use it for >> Role, it probably makes sense here too. >> > > I'm for creating two types: a basic ItemList separate from CreativeWork > and an EditedList that inherits from both CreativeWork and the basic > ItemList. Otherwise, we are going to keep creating strange semantics to > preserve the existing semantics. > > - Vicki > > > Vicki Tardif Holland | Ontologist | vtardif@google.com > >
Received on Thursday, 7 August 2014 02:50:04 UTC