W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-powderwg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: DC Terms, FOAF etc

From: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:54:35 +0100
Message-ID: <4873638B.8080902@icra.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
CC: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>

Thanks very much Dan,

A couple of comments below.

Dan Brickley wrote:

> Thanks for the nice note. In the interests of simplicity and POWDER 
> users not needing to include loads of extra namespaces to express a 
> basic label, I do suggest making use of the dcterms vocab instead. The 
> new Dublin Core stuff is much closer to a FOAFish design and we'll 
> probably have direct mapping/equivalence expressed in the schemas at 
> some point (so long as that doesn't mess up our OWL 2 compatibility plans).
> I do think we have some stuff in FOAF that adds value to POWDER labels, 
> and we'll be having more yet. For instance, isn't it rather nice to know 
> the :opend and :homepage of a label creator? Or identify them indirectly 
> via a hashed mailbox ID that can be fed to Google's SGAPI service, 
> http://code.google.com/apis/socialgraph/docs/ ?

Yes - all those things are important when you're trying to press the 
metaphorical 'Oh Yeah?' button when you come across a claim

> So my recommendation would be to make sure the basic creator/Agent thing 
> is doable in plain DC terms, but allow FOAF for adding more optional 
> detail.

OK, well, we've actually managed to hide away FOAF within POWDER in its 
XML format by having an element in our own namespace (maker) that is 
GRDDL'd in foaf:maker. Once you get past foaf:maker, you're out of 
POWDER and into the wide world beyond so, yes, it is perhaps neater (and 
process-safer) to do it all within the dcterms namespace - even though I 
think is is a likely usage:

   <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="..." />



Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2008 12:55:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:06:04 UTC