Re: [vcard] OWL or RDF for vCard?

On Monday 05 February 2007 07:46, Harry Halpin wrote:
> Currently one distinguishing characteristic between the earlier vCard
> note [1] and the new work in progress [2] is that the earlier one is
> in vanilla RDF while the latter is in OWL. 

I think you forgot the URLs for those references :-)

> What do people think? Keep it in OWL?

Would users have to relate to OWL in any way? Wouldn't the OWL use be 
rather hidden in the ontology? As long as the users for the most part 
will only have to relate to the classes and properties they are used to 
from hcard, then I don't see anything wrong with a few additional OWL 
triples. If, OTOH, they would have to seek understanding of OWL to use 
the vCard ontology, then it seems rather evil, yes...

Cheers,

Kjetil
-- 
Kjetil Kjernsmo
Programmer / Astrophysicist / Ski-orienteer / Orienteer / Mountaineer
kjetil@kjernsmo.net
Homepage: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/     OpenPGP KeyID: 6A6A0BBC