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

Re: Draft schema for QA sites

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:25:58 +0000
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=7N-wF_Aub8Xq8hSQhg4sD+qTLrf-0k0jFLgWba-enNtw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Guha <guha@google.com>
Cc: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>, Shawn Simister <simister@google.com>, elf Pavlik <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, St├ęphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 29 January 2014 19:04, Guha <guha@google.com> wrote:
> We are close enough to covering FAQs that I would like us to.
> What are we missing?

I think the main thing we do is not exclude them. Classic
Internet-style FAQs still exist, even if the trend is towards more
social QA sites where answers are attributed, more dynamic etc.

So -
Question is currently defined as "A detailed question that a user is
seeking an answer from a community of experts." (test site

How about "A detailed question, for example one specifically being
asked in a community site, or noted as a Frequently Asked Question

For Answer we have "An answer to a question." which is fine.

Most of the others in
that assume QA community sites could simply be omitted for an FAQ

For those who want to poke around the FAQ universe a bit more, see
nearby FAQ utilities: faq-o-matic,
makefaq, http://www.lodestar2.com/software/makefaq/
phpmyfaq, http://www.phpmyfaq.de/
and of course Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAQ

Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 19:26:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:21 UTC