- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:21:39 +0100
- To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, Daniel Dulitz <daniel@google.com>
- Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
Thanks Daniel for raising this, and Stéphane for digging out the previous discussion. Let's get this fixed. I've raised an issue to track this as https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/12 with the summary "Comment is under UserInteractions not CreativeWork; the former focus on aggregation". This does not capture all the nuances but I've linked the full threads from the tracker. Couple of brief points for now: 1. Even though we don't assert that Comment is subclass of CreativeWork, we also don't anywhere assert that no comments are CreativeWorks. It might be there are some idioms where treating some comments as creative works in this way is useful. 2. Yes, Schema.org's use of plurality for class (and property) names is unconventional. I've amended https://www.w3.org/2011/webschema/track/issues/5 (which is about plural usage in property names) to note the class situation needs handling too. Can we get a couple of sample real-world pages that can guide our decisions here? Stéphane - do you have something from Drupal 7 maybe? cheers, Dan
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 19:22:10 UTC