- From: Sam Goto <goto@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:41:13 -0700
- To: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Cc: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMtUnc4YeuAeW=y8Yy3XhYsn9f1zLrU+Z6i6HkEWRiBF2VChtw@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 1:56 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ < perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote: > On 09/21/2014 10:44 PM, Sam Goto wrote: > > InteractAction was meant for interactions between people-people or > > people-organizations. I don't think it would fit. > > > > You could try to make a case for some intersection with UpdateAction, > > but I think that starting separately and merging afterwards seems > > reasonable too (I.e. making a distinction on operations on devices > > versus data/collections). > > I have impression that we again face differences between actions > performed on *abstract things* and operations performed on *web resources* > > IMO schema:UpdateAction with sub types tries to cover operations on *web > resources* (looks to me like CRUD), while almost all the rest looks like > actions on *abstract things* > Actions are applicable to a lot of different objects, "abstract things" versus "web resources" is just one way to slice it. What problem specifically are you trying to solve/clarify? And, is that problem isomorphic to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTPRange-14? > Then we also have ones like schema:ViewAction (wikipedia page or real > monument) or schema:WatchAction (online video or theater play)... > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2014Sep/0050.html > > > > On Sep 21, 2014 1:38 PM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net > > <mailto:markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>> wrote: > > > > Hi Vicki, > > > > On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 11:21 PM, Vicki Tardif Holland > wrote: > > > In order to model the operation of devices and applications, we > > propose > > > adding the following new Actions: > > > > > > http://schema.org/OperateAction > > > http://schema.org/ActivateAction > > > http://schema.org/DectivateAction > > > http://schema.org/ResumeAction > > > http://schema.org/SuspendAction > > > > I do understand that you want to "group" those actions under > > OperateAction but what distinguishes OperateAction from an > > InteractAction (definition would need to be generalized to include > > devices) or an UpdateAction? IMHO, the definition of UpdateAction > > would fit quite well for those new actions: > > > > The act of managing by changing/editing the state of the object. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Markus > > > > > > -- > > Markus Lanthaler > > @markuslanthaler > >
Received on Monday, 22 September 2014 19:41:41 UTC