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

Re: wdrs:issuedby fc. foaf:maker and dcterms:creator

From: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@uninsubria.it>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:18:18 +0200
Message-ID: <4884626A.4070400@uninsubria.it>
To: Public POWDER <public-powderwg@w3.org>

> Andrea, I hope you don't mind me moving this to the public list and 
> renaming the thread - it's an important discussion. Thanks for pursuing it.

No problem at all, Phil!

> [snip] 
> 
> What we want to be able to do is either of
> 
> <wdrs:issuedby>
>   <foaf:Agent>
>     ...
>   </foaf:Agent>
> </wdrs:issuedBy>
> 
> <wdrs:issuedby>
>   <dcterms:Agent>
>   ...
>   </dcterms:Agent>
> </wdrs:issuedby>
> 
> _without_ having to define our own Agent class - 2 is enough already!

I agree. Note however that, by defining a class wdrs:Agent as the union 
of dcterms:Agent and foaf:Agent, we are not requiring DR authors to use 
it. They can use directly either dcterms:Agent or foaf:Agent. So, 
defining wdrs:Agent would be just a way to support what you say above. 
Moreover, such class would give us the opportunity of explaining what we 
think can be DR author, and it could be later refined in order to make 
it more near the actual notion of a DR author (as discussed in the 
thread starting at [1]).

> [snip]
> 
> Now... POWDER-S /can/ be written independently of any originating POWDER 
> doc and, even if it is created by performing a transform on such a doc, 
> we say that syntactic differences don't matter as long as the semantics 
> are the same - i.e. the POWDER XSLT is not normative.
> 
> Therefore, as I understand it, a POWDER-S doc could say
> 
> <owl:Ontology rdf:about="">
>   <foaf:maker>
>     Agent here or referenced using rdf:resource= on maker property
>   </foaf:maker>
> </owl:Ontology>
> 
> but is this so given what we say about semantic equivalence?
> 
> We're stuck between practicality and broad acceptance on the one hand 
> (i.e. FOAF) and future-proofing/standardisation on the other (i.e 
> dcterms). So we're trying to have our cake and eat it by just defining 
> the property and leaving the choice of the DR author.
> 
> Now, at the f2f, we weren't 100% sure we had it right so if, in the cold 
> light of day, this is an error then we'll need to go back to allowing 
> the use of either maker or creator directly - we really can't make it 
> hard for people to do what comes naturally so to speak. But the keeping 
> it simple by mandating a single property - the only one that MUST be 
> included in every POWDER doc - does have its attractions too.

A possible solution is the following:
- defining wdrs:issuedby without specifying any subproperty relationship 
with foaf:maker / dcterms:creator; in the specs, we state the semantics 
of wdrs:issued, and we also say that it can be replaced by similar 
terms, defined elsewhere, and we suggest (for the moment) 
dcterms:creator and foaf:maker
- the range of wdrs:issuedby can be left undefined or defined as the 
union of dcterms:Agent and foaf:Agent

Andrea

[1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2008Jul/0046.html
Received on Monday, 21 July 2008 10:18:59 GMT

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