W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Project vocabulary

From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 04:53:51 +0000
Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
Message-Id: <91F10119-9D7E-4764-A0A4-81EA611677CB@deri.org>
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>

> Thoughts?

Luv it and would make my life [1] easier :)

KUTGW!

Cheers,
	Michael

[1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/people/ 
index.html#relating-a-person-to-a-project
--
Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html

On 26 Feb 2012, at 20:20, Danny Ayers wrote:

> Hello Vocabularians,
>
> I'd like to float the possibility of a general-purpose project
> description sub-schema to get some first impressions before attempting
> to build a proper proposal.
>
> There are lots of applications online (and offline) for project
> management, Getting Things Done, todo lists and so on. There are also
> quite a lot of more domain-specific systems that have very similar
> requirements and would require pretty much the same core vocabulary -
> bug trackers being a good example. I believe it would be productive to
> be able to expose the data from tools such as these to make e.g.
> online status reports machine-readable.
>
> Some years ago I put together an RDFS schema for this. At the time I
> surveyed what was already available and looked for common terms and
> very roughly wrote it up. The (still incomplete) result is at [1]. I
> don't think anyone else picked up on it, but I did hack around with
> using the vocab myself. The basic modeling seemed to work ok, though I
> found I didn't actually need a lot of the terms I'd originally listed.
> Reviewing it today I reckon perhaps 4 classes and 11 properties form
> the core. Of these at least one of the classes (Agent) and maybe 6 of
> the properties (mostly time-related) aren't project-specific, suitable
> terms probably already exist. There aren't that many so I'll list them
> all below. I think they're self-explanatory, though there are working
> definitions at the link above.
>
> *** Classes ***
> Project
> Task
> Goal
> Agent
>
> *** Properties ***
> (with usage example)
>
> hasTask
> Project hasTask Task
>
> hasGoal
> Project hasGoal Goal
>
> priority
> (Project | Task | Goal) priority {value}
>
> status
> (Project | Task | Goal) status {value}
>
> dependsOn
> (Project | Task | Goal) dependsOn (Task | Goal)
>
> hasAgent
> (Project | Task | Goal) hasAgent Agent
>
> the other properties all take literal date values:
>
> duration
> submittedDate
> startDate
> targetDate
> finishDate
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
> Danny.
>
> [1] http://purl.org/stuff/project
>
> -- 
> http://dannyayers.com
>
> http://webbeep.it  - text to tones and back again
>
Received on Monday, 27 February 2012 04:54:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 06:48:59 GMT