W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > January 2014

Re: schema.org docs: minor issues for next update

From: Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 22:34:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJcoVMgR+=uAf0XbiUbRazGY33oy4yNnRtZR-+=s5fA6_f9N2g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Cc: Sam Goto <goto@google.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 4:37 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:

> On 5 December 2013 05:20, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:51 PM, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
> wrote:
> >>> 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!
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>> 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?
> >>
> >> Looks great Dan--thanks!
> >
> > Dang. I hate to say this, but it looks like all of of these problems
> > have returned in the actual production 1.0e revision that was shipped
> > out (and on sdopending now as well) :/
>
> Oh - that's not good! Ah well, at least we've got good candidates for
> another release next week...
>
> In general I'm trying to get schema.org onto a tighter release cycle.
> There's a lot to do, and a lot of small fixes that can be made. And
> unmade, it seems. Thanks for that catch, I'll get these fixed again.
>

Given the current long-ish thread that began with another misunderstanding
about the intention of Offer to be applicable to services as well as
products, I took another peek at sdopending.appspot.com and noticed that
the minor changes discussed here are not yet in place; nor are the
"broadened Offer definitions" changes. So... if 1.0f is coming any time
soon to kick off 2014, it would be great to see those fall into place first
;)

Thanks,
Dan
Received on Wednesday, 8 January 2014 03:35:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:20 UTC