- From: Stasinos Konstantopoulos <konstant@iit.demokritos.gr>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:23:44 +0200
- To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Cc: Government Linked Data Working Group WG <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
Michael, all, hi. If it's important for your application that you distinguish individual rooms, you must extend VCard so that individual rooms are representible. VCard, IIRC, has handles for extending with application-specific fields. You can then simply do this: <http://colcids.com/person/42> org:basedAt :r101 . :r101 rdf:type org:Site ; org:siteAdress [ something VCard that says Room 101 at Building CCHQ ]. This particular mini-Site is the org:siteOf the org:OrganizationalUnit that <http://colcids.com/person/42> is org:memberOf. Org does not have a subSite property, but that's not really necessary here. This is my spec-writing 2c. My academic 2c would involve creating a schema that allows one to infer that a site address that points to Building CCHQ subsumes all site addresses that point to individual rooms in the building. But I don't think this is necessary for our purposes, all we need is a way to represent how somebody can be reached. Unless I am mistaken about why we need to model rooms and buildings and there is a requirement that I have missed somewhere. Hence my original question about what the intended usage is. Best, Stasinos On 30 January 2012 09:46, Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> wrote: > > Stasinos, > > >> If the intended usage is one of describing organizational structure, >> the Org ontology (or whatever we end up using to represent >> organizations) should be adequate, as arbitrarily small >> OrganizationUnitS can have individual hasSite properties, which can be >> arbitrarily fine-grained, down to a desk in an office in a building at >> an address somewhere on the planet. Again, it's a matter of allowing a >> fine enough address schema. > > > > I'm not disagreeing here, but we're in the spec writing business and not > having an academic discussion. > > > Can you please provide me with a Turtle snippet in ORG + vCard that does the > same as: > > [[ > @prefix rooms: <http://vocab.deri.ie/rooms#> . > @prefix : <>. <http://colcids.com/person/42> a foaf:Person . > :CCHQ a rooms:Building ; > rooms:contains :r101 . > > :r101 a rooms:Room ; > rooms:occupant <http://colcids.com/person/42> . > ]] > > > Cheers, > Michael > > -- > Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow > LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre > DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute > NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway > Ireland, Europe > Tel. +353 91 495730 > http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ > http://sw-app.org/about.html > > On 30 Jan 2012, at 07:26, Stasinos Konstantopoulos wrote: > >> Still, it seems to me that this is not a separate issue. >> >> If the intended usage is one of finding out how to reach people, it is >> a matter of defining/choosing a contact information schema that is >> detailed enough to achieve this. >> >> If the intended usage is one of describing organizational structure, >> the Org ontology (or whatever we end up using to represent >> organizations) should be adequate, as arbitrarily small >> OrganizationUnitS can have individual hasSite properties, which can be >> arbitrarily fine-grained, down to a desk in an office in a building at >> an address somewhere on the planet. Again, it's a matter of allowing a >> fine enough address schema. >> >> s >> >> >> On 30 January 2012 09:07, Michael Hausenblas >> <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Stasinos, >>> >>> Thanks for your question. >>> >>> >>>> What is the use case for this? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> For example, we use it in http://lab.linkeddata.deri.ie/2010/deri-rooms >>> ... >>> >>> >>>> I mean, how is this different from >>>> representing contact information for a person (ISSUE 24)? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> See [1] - in a sense an extension of contact information with potentially >>> finer granular descriptions than an address. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Michael >>> >>> [1] >>> >>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/people/index.html#relating-a-person-to-a-building-or-room >>> -- >>> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow >>> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre >>> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute >>> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway >>> Ireland, Europe >>> Tel. +353 91 495730 >>> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ >>> http://sw-app.org/about.html >>> >>> On 30 Jan 2012, at 07:02, Stasinos Konstantopoulos wrote: >>> >>>> Michael, all, >>>> >>>> What is the use case for this? I mean, how is this different from >>>> representing contact information for a person (ISSUE 24)? >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Stasinos >>>> >>>> >>>> On 29 January 2012 13:07, Government Linked Data Working Group Issue >>>> Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ISSUE-23: How to relate a person to a building/room? [People] >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/23 >>>>> >>>>> Raised by: Michael Hausenblas >>>>> On product: People >>>>> >>>>> There are really two issues here, namely how to represent buildings and >>>>> rooms and how to relate a person to the building/room. It seems that >>>>> the >>>>> Buildings and Rooms Vocabulary [1] would in fact be capable to do this, >>>>> however the namespace is sub-optimal, in terms of stability. >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://vocab.deri.ie/rooms# >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >
Received on Monday, 30 January 2012 14:24:29 UTC