Re: Revising the WAV Vocabulary

On 9/15/11 9:09 AM, Bob Ferris wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> what do you think about revising the WAC Vocabulary [1]? I guess, the 
> majority of issues are already mentioned at [2]. I would only like to 
> add the following remarks:
>
> - add a human-readable representation of this vocabulary (btw, this is 
> still a drawback of the majority of the W3C vocabularies, e.g., the 
> RDF, RDFS and OWL namespace - proper content negotiation please!)
> - I rendered the WAC Vocabulary with Parrot [3] (see [4]) and 
> discovered that acl:agent property is defined twice - each of them has 
> a different range (I would vote for the foaf:Agent range)
> - maybe we can already merge the WAC Vocabulary with some terms of the 
> TAC Vocabulary or another triple-based approach (however, I guess, we 
> have to investigate here a bit more time into a deeper comparison).

+1

Kingsley
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Bo
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/acl
> [2] http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl/Vocabulary
> [3] http://ontorule-project.eu/parrot/parrot
> [4] 
> http://ontorule-project.eu/parrot/parrot?documentUri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fns%2Fauth%2Facl&mimetype=default&profile=technical&language=en&customizeCssUrl=
>
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen