Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Issues arising at schema.org conversation
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  2 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Brian Ausland  
View profile  
 More options Sep 21 2011, 4:39 pm
From: Brian Ausland <bausl...@bcoe.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:39:33 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Wed, Sep 21 2011 4:39 pm
Subject: Issues arising at schema.org conversation
Bing, Google, Yahoo are intending to develop a given set of controlled
vocabularies for many topic areas that will be their primary means of
crawling and identifying and surfacing resources. There is a concern
that the vocabularies that are selected will create obscurity for
those repositories that find their vocabularies inconsistent with
schema.org's.
The collective Big 3 task force has assured all that there wil be a
process by which modifications, amendments, and additions can be made
over time, particularly when use-data shows popularity or traction for
competing vocabulary items or new ones all together from the
field...for instance if NASA finds an additional planet.
However, there was concern that when these 3 agents effectively adopt
an initial, albeit, open to modification, vocabulary...with the basis
of credible use and traction of a competing taxonomy as the impetus
for that change, is likely to not occur when the "3 big directors of
the main interstates" direct almost all traffic to the existing
resources based on the adopted or endorsed vocabularies. Seems like
structuring congruently to these endorsed vocabularies on some level
will aid in internal search and discovery and provide some initial
push for common data and meta-data documentation of learning objects
across collections.

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Joshua Marks  
View profile  
 More options Sep 21 2011, 5:26 pm
From: Joshua Marks <jma...@curriki.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:26:28 -0700
Local: Wed, Sep 21 2011 5:26 pm
Subject: Re: [learningregistry] Issues arising at schema.org conversation
All,

It is the LRMI group lead by Creative Commons and the AEP that is building and managing the extension of this learning resource section of the Schema.org tree. The process can be followed on the google group for LRMI.  At this point, it is not expressing a controlled vocabulary, but rather a tag type classification similar to LOM, but simpler and focused on real use cases relating to search and discovery.  

The actual vocabularies will be the responsibility of the content publisher, but suggested or default vocabularies are likely. Much to come, and the use case form I provided previously is needed to capture your requirements.

Best,

Joshua

Fat fingered from my iPhone

On Sep 21, 2011, at 1:39 PM, Brian Ausland <bausl...@bcoe.org> wrote:


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »