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

Re: PROPOSED RESOLUTION: use dcterms for the maker element and rename to creator

From: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@uninsubria.it>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:45:06 +0200
Message-ID: <48737D72.5080400@uninsubria.it>
To: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>

+1 from me too.

The only issue I see here is that, this way, DR authors should use 
dcterms:Agent instead of foaf:Person / foaf:Organization in their RDF 
(FOAF?) /profile/ (i.e., the set of RDF statements describing the DR 
author). And foaf:Person / foaf:Organization are more "popular" than 
dcterms:Agent, as far as I know. And it may be often the case that a DR 
author already has a FOAF profile to pointing to: should he/she modify it?

Probably this will be fixed in the future. According to their formal 
definition, between foaf:Agent (and its subclasses) and dcterms:Agent 
there does not exist any subClassOf / equivalentClass relationship. 
However, they look pretty similar - at least based on their NL definition:
- foaf:Agent: "An agent (eg. person, group, software or physical 
artifact)." [1]
- dcterms:Agent: "A resource that acts or has the power to act. Examples 
of Agent include person, organization, and software agent." [2]

If I'm not mistaken, this may correspond to one of the foaf<->dcterms 
mappings that Dan mentioned in his mail [3].

Andrea

[1]http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_Agent
[2]http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/history/#Agent-001
[3]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2008Jul/0029.html


Phil Archer wrote:
> 
> Following my exchange with Dan Bri just now [1], I'd like to propose 
> that we change the name of the POWDER <maker> element to <creator> and 
> change the transform so that this becomes <dcterms:creator>.
> 
> Note that the legacy (and commonly seen) dc:creator just takes a string 
> whereas dcterms:creator has the range of dcterms:Agent.
> 
> This does not prevent using FOAF terms within a dcterms:Agent class 
> (which is good because FOAF has some very useful terms already) but it 
> does eliminate POWDER's formal dependence on FOAF.
> 
> We can consider the resolution properly next week at the f2f but if 
> there are any comments ahead of that, please speak up.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Phil.
> 
> 
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2008Jul/0028.html 
> onwards
> 
Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2008 14:45:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:42:13 GMT