- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 22:15:19 +0200
- To: <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 20 Sep 2014 at 23:10, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote: > On 09/20/2014 10:25 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: >> "spouse": "notApplicable" >> >> is incredibly vague. The person could be single, widowed, be secretly >> married, be in a culture where marriage does not confer "spouse-ness" or >> "spouse-ness" could simply be irrelevant to the context in question. > I agree that it doesn't clarify a lot but at least signals N/A, which > gives at least *some clue*. > > BTW vcard:None, vcard:Other, vcard:Unknown exist as sub classes of > vcard:Gender schema:gender http://schema.org/gender could at least > recommend some external enumeration! > > Thank you for all the feedback Karen, if no one else finds types like > schema:None and schema:NotApplicable useful, of course I will not argue > about it any more :) I'm quite sure that sooner or later we will need something like schema:None / schema:Null / schema:Nil to be able to explicitly state that there's no data for something but I agree with Karen that schema:NotApplicable is extremely vague and doesn't convey more information than simply omitting that field. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Sunday, 21 September 2014 20:15:49 UTC