- From: Seth Russell <russell.seth@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 10:52:09 -0800
- To: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
Richard, > I'm not sure that an RSS1.0 Item is the same as a Tagging; the > intention of a Tagging is solely to capture the n-ary relationship > between a tag, an agent, a resource, and a date (and anything else), > which together make up a particular tagging of the resource by the > agent. They're certainly similar in some aspects (being dated > annotations of a resource), but I'm not sure if the semantics are > sufficiently similar to warrant the same vocabulary. I would say that Tagging is a sub class of Items. I think we need to ask how is this ontology to be used? What is it's practical value? What is going to prompt people to write meta data in this ontology? But we cannot ignore what is already happening with folksonomy. The feed over at del.icio.us is already about 10 taggings *per second* - to verify that just go over to http://del.icio.us/ and keep reloading the page. Now consider all the other folksonomy.servers and you already have a Mississippi river of taggings flowing. Each of these taggings is collecting the meta data that your ontology is addressing. Now are you going to just ignore that gigantic river and make up some semantically pure ontology? -- Seth Russell http://bozofaust.blogspot.com/
Received on Friday, 25 March 2005 18:52:40 UTC