New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Meta-issue for sdo-enceladus release (likely as version 3.3) #1569

Open
danbri opened this Issue Mar 27, 2017 · 9 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
7 participants
@danbri
Contributor

danbri commented Mar 27, 2017

Targeting for publication: May 2017 (as v3.3)

See http://webschemas.org/docs/releases.html#v3.3 for drafts in progress and associated release notes.

Note that from version 3.2 onwards we are developing in the master branch here in Github, rather than using release-named branches. We keep the habit of code-naming releases, in case we change our mind about the specific version number to assign, but it is no longer also a Github branch.

Specifics:

  • Legislation extension - merged to pending
  • merged, but needs final review and summary in releases.html (note: defines lots of inverse properties; natural final home would be a legal or civic -related hosted extension)
  • NewsArticle-related improvements #1525 (queued for review in http://webschemas.org/docs/releases.html#v3.3 )
  • strawman is in place, some points being discussed, examples could be extended.
  • HowTo structure, generalizing Recipe for non-food creations. Final drafting discussions in #1616
    • should be merged into Core but let's review the PR first
  • EmployerReview #1576 1576
  • to/cc/bccRecipient properties for EmailMessage #1590

@danbri danbri referenced this issue Mar 27, 2017

Open

Meta: schema.org planning #1

14 of 21 tasks complete

@danbri danbri self-assigned this May 10, 2017

@danbri danbri changed the title from Meta-issue for sdo-somethingsomething release (likely as version 3.3) to Meta-issue for sdo-enceladus release (likely as version 3.3) May 10, 2017

danbri added a commit that referenced this issue May 10, 2017

danbri added a commit that referenced this issue May 22, 2017

@tfrancart

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tfrancart

tfrancart May 23, 2017

Contributor

External links in the release description (at http://webschemas.org/docs/releases.html#v3.3) ("European Legislation Identifier (ELI) ontology" and "ELI taskforce") don't work, they are interpreted as relative links). Sorry to be picky :-)

Contributor

tfrancart commented May 23, 2017

External links in the release description (at http://webschemas.org/docs/releases.html#v3.3) ("European Legislation Identifier (ELI) ontology" and "ELI taskforce") don't work, they are interpreted as relative links). Sorry to be picky :-)

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri May 23, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

danbri commented May 23, 2017

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri May 23, 2017

Contributor

Note: @nicolastorzec made some useful comments on the NewsArticle-related vocabulary, in particular that that SponsoredContentArticle type might need clarification w.r.t. when any CreativeWork with a sponsor counts under that more specific type.

Contributor

danbri commented May 23, 2017

Note: @nicolastorzec made some useful comments on the NewsArticle-related vocabulary, in particular that that SponsoredContentArticle type might need clarification w.r.t. when any CreativeWork with a sponsor counts under that more specific type.

@RichardWallis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@RichardWallis

RichardWallis May 26, 2017

Contributor

Following discussions, updating description for publicAccess to clarify usage.

Contributor

RichardWallis commented May 26, 2017

Following discussions, updating description for publicAccess to clarify usage.

@thadguidry

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@thadguidry

thadguidry May 26, 2017

@RichardWallis Thanks Richard, looks good.

thadguidry commented May 26, 2017

@RichardWallis Thanks Richard, looks good.

@scor

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@scor

scor Jun 2, 2017

Contributor

I'd be happy to review but wanted to check first if there is any work in progress to incorporate the feedback received so far.

Contributor

scor commented Jun 2, 2017

I'd be happy to review but wanted to check first if there is any work in progress to incorporate the feedback received so far.

@danbri

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danbri

danbri Jun 2, 2017

Contributor

Thanks @scor - you might look at #1525 and the discussion around NewsArticle, in particular @nicolastorzec and @tmarshbing 's comments. This is for changes that are mainly in the Pending section, so I'd argue that we can continue the conversation after actually publishing things into pending.schema.org proper for v3.3. I should be clear that at Google we are actively interested in using richer markup around news articles, and that we plan to explore implementation and report back on issues around markup usability (and if schema.org takes a different route after Pending, that's fine). The most fundamental discussion is around whether to use properties and multiple typing explicity in the markup or to simplify things by defining new types (which sometimes might have multiple supertypes), i.e. hardcoding possible common cases into schema.org.

Contributor

danbri commented Jun 2, 2017

Thanks @scor - you might look at #1525 and the discussion around NewsArticle, in particular @nicolastorzec and @tmarshbing 's comments. This is for changes that are mainly in the Pending section, so I'd argue that we can continue the conversation after actually publishing things into pending.schema.org proper for v3.3. I should be clear that at Google we are actively interested in using richer markup around news articles, and that we plan to explore implementation and report back on issues around markup usability (and if schema.org takes a different route after Pending, that's fine). The most fundamental discussion is around whether to use properties and multiple typing explicity in the markup or to simplify things by defining new types (which sometimes might have multiple supertypes), i.e. hardcoding possible common cases into schema.org.

@nicolastorzec

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nicolastorzec

nicolastorzec Aug 16, 2017

Contributor

@danbri, in the release note, the first link to issue 1525 is broken:

  • it reads https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues1525c
  • but should be https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1525
Contributor

nicolastorzec commented Aug 16, 2017

@danbri, in the release note, the first link to issue 1525 is broken:

  • it reads https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues1525c
  • but should be https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1525
@sopekmir

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sopekmir

sopekmir Aug 18, 2017

Contributor

Dan, All, are there still chances to include in v3.3 our documentation for auto.schema.org:
#1677 ?

Contributor

sopekmir commented Aug 18, 2017

Dan, All, are there still chances to include in v3.3 our documentation for auto.schema.org:
#1677 ?

danbri added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 20, 2018

Adding automotive.html docs from the auto community group.
See #1569 (comment)

@RichardWallis can you advise on current boilerplate (js for cse, css etc.).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment