On 03/01/2015 04:06 PM, James M Snell wrote: > I'm strongly -1 to any kind of normative AS2 dependency on schema.org, even > with the proposed extension model*. It's simply not necessary and would add > very little benefit. Using the two together is beneficial in some cases > that I can imagine but a normative dependency would add little to no > significant technical benefit right now. If you'd like to write up a note > describing a non-normative use of the two together, that would likely be > helpful. NOTE: Using Activity Streams 2.0 with Schema.org sounds like a good idea! I don't say that I can see one clear solution here. I just see need for some more clarifications, and can see many different possible outcomes which will put people implementing AS2.0 in a bit better position than if we left it as of now and gave it no extra attention. For everyone interested, also relevant issue on github: https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/220 BTW Hydra CG did somehow similar exercise over a year ago Integration of Hydra into Schema.org http://www.hydra-cg.com/spec/latest/schema.org/ "This document was created to help with the design of potential Actions in Schema.org. While Hydra hasn't been included in Schema.org (yet), it influenced its design. The document is clearly outdated and serves purely as a historical reference."
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2015 17:08:18 UTC