W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > September 2009

Re: vCard RDF merge....

From: Peter Mika <pmika@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 21:24:41 +0200
Message-ID: <4AB28CF9.50109@yahoo-inc.com>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
CC: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>, Brian Suda <brian.suda@gmail.com>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>, "public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Hi Harry,

Agreed and agreed!

Sorry for not having followed the discussion.

Peter

Harry Halpin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Peter Mika <pmika@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>   
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I'm following some of the discussion, but not all, unfortunately :(
>>
>>     
>>>        <#me> v:tel [ a v:Home ; rdf:value "123456789" ] .
>>>
>>>       
>> I would only go for this if this was as easy to write in RDFa as
>>
>> <#me> v:homeTel "123456789" .
>>
>>     
>
> Well, what I was proposing is that we have a "blank node" style that
> lets people type v:tel properties, and a shortcut property for
> commonly-used properties like v:homeTel. The advantages of this
> proposal is that:
>
> 1) It's backwards compatible with vCard 2006
> 2) But lets people express (and so round-trip) with actually existing
> vCards that are more complicated, as earlier VCard let us do.
>
> I thought we had agreement on this. While we can't make it logically
> equal using RDF semantics, we can make the namespace document explain
> very clearly's what's going on.
>
> Also, +1 on not using URIs for telephone numbers, but just plain literals.
>
>   
>> But I'm afraid that's not the case.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>     
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 19:27:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 17 September 2009 19:27:28 GMT