W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Common Tag, FOAF and Dublin Core Re: Common Tag - semantic tagging convention

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:10:26 +0200
Message-ID: <4A3A3CC2.5000401@danbri.org>
To: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
CC: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, public-lod@w3.org
On 18/6/09 15:07, Thomas Baker wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:49:56PM +0200, Dan Brickley wrote:
>>> Well I actually meant dcterms:creator when I wrote dc:creator, sorry. So
>>> you can link your personal tags to your foaf profile, for example.
>>> And it's consistent even for tag:AutoTag, since the range of
>>> dcterms:creator is dcterms:Agent, including person, organisation and
>>> software agent as well.
>>> Unless I miss some sublte distinguo dcterms:Agent is equivalent to
>>> foaf:Agent, and dcterms:creator equivalent to foaf:maker. BTW, with due
>>> respect to danbri, I wish FOAF would be revised to align whenever
>>> possible on dcterms vocabulary, now that it has clean declarations of
>>> classes, domains and ranges ...
>>> http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms is worth (re)visiting :-)
>> Completely agree. I'm very happy with the direction of DC terms. The
>> foaf:maker property was essential for a while, until DC was cleaned up.
>> I'll mark it as a sub-property of dcterms:creator. I hope we'll get
>> reciprocal claims into the Dublin Core RDF files some day too...
>>
>> Copying Tom Baker here. Tom - what would the best process be for adding
>> in mapping claims to the DC Terms RDF? Maybe we could draft some RDF,
>> put it onto dublincore.org elsewhere, and for now add a seeAlso from the
>> namespace RDF?
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> If you could write up a short proposal -- how the properties are
> defined, with a proposed mapping claim -- we could discuss this
> in the DCMI Usage Board and take a decision.  We associate
> changes in the namespace RDF (and related namespace
> documentation) with formal decisions so would need to follow a
> process.

Sounds like a plan! Thanks. I'll take it to DC lists and report back 
here as things progress.

cheers,

Dan
Received on Thursday, 18 June 2009 13:11:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:21 UTC