- From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 17:16:48 +0100
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- CC: Sam Goto <goto@google.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org Vocabs" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
On 12/21/2014 04:47 PM, James M Snell wrote: > Elf, one critical aspect worth stressing is the fact that there are > activity streams implementers who have absolutely no desire to do anything > with the schema.org vocabulary. For those that want to use the two > together, there are simple ways of connecting the two and reconciling the > differences. However, ironing out all of differences and overlaps is not a > problem that's even the least bit interesting to me. There will be > overlaps, there will be inconsistencies, and those are perfectly > acceptable. I see difference between working on Activity Streams independently and publishing it under http://activitystrea.ms/ namespace. From working on it as one of deliverables of Social WG and publishing it on http://www.w3.org/ IMO second requires quite more coordination with other activities hosted by W3C. Recent email from Harry Halpin, who acts as W3C Team Contact in Social WG, once again states interest in trying to search for possible alignments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2014Dec/0072.html Of course we can disagree and have different opinions on this topic, I would just like to emphasize that at this moment we both represent here our *personal* opinions and so far nothing backed by any existing resolutions in Social WG! Also https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas states: "Groups who maintain Web Schemas are welcome to use this forum as a feedback channel, in additional to whatever independent mechanisms they also offer. In particular, the Schema.org initiative has adopted this group as its primary public feedback forum. Others are invited to do likewise." Recently I suggested to discuss Vocabulary related work in Social WG/IG over public-vocabs mailing list. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2014Dec/0071.html > On Dec 21, 2014 4:38 AM, "☮ elf Pavlik ☮" <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> > wrote: > >> I replied on github with matching occurrences in schemaorg examples.txt >> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/pull/59 >> >> James also wrote some very nice examples on: >> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Expanded_Vocabulary >> >> He uses there as:target along as:object and as:participant. Schema.org >> uses schema:target for very different purpose. Possibly some of examples >> in my pending pull request could become even more straight forward if >> schema had something equivalent to as:target available! >> https://github.com/danbri/schemaorg/pull/15 >> >> I would find it super helpful if everyone interested in >> actions/activities would get familiar with *both* Schema.org and >> Activity Streams examples, and then we could schedule one telecon in >> January to discuss various possibilities for improving their alignment. >> >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: Proposal: drop instrument, participant and status >> Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 23:08:53 +0000 >> Resent-From: public-socialweb@w3.org >> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 15:08:05 -0800 >> From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> >> To: public-socialweb@w3.org <public-socialweb@w3.org> >> >> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/pull/59 >> >> - James >> >> >> >> >
Received on Sunday, 21 December 2014 16:17:14 UTC