W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2010

RE: Representing vCard Objects in RDF (W3C Member Submission)

From: Brian Peterson <publicayers@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:05:53 -0500
To: "'Harry Halpin'" <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, <public-xg-socialweb@w3.org>, "'semantic-web at W3C'" <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Cc: "'Renato Iannella'" <renato@nicta.com.au>
Message-id: <004e01caaab6$5c13ed20$143bc760$@net>
Ok, sure... but why not provide a relation to map between people and their
vcards? That won't stop people from applying the vcard predicates directly
on person URIs, but it would make it easier for people to create different
vcards for people and orgs but still map them back to the person/org.

Personally I'd prefer dropping the VCard domain assertions on predicates
like fn. At least then I could use the vcard predicates without having to
conclude that Fred is a VCard because someone used the v:fn predicate. 

I'm not sure you lose anything by dropping the VCard domain assertions. And
if you add something like hasVCard, you let people create vcard resources
that are linked back to their associated people/orgs.

Given that people are likely to put the vcard predicates directly on people
uris, but the vcard ontology is intended to create vcard resources, I'm not
sure you can avoid the complexity of querying with _and_ without the
indirection. There's no way to avoid that complication; however, having the
VCard domain assertions together with the lack of a hasVCard relation, it
seems to me that the vcard ontology is encouraging this confusion between
vcards and people/orgs. 

Brian 

-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Halpin [mailto:hhalpin@ibiblio.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 6:18 PM
To: Brian Peterson
Cc: Renato Iannella; public-xg-socialweb@w3.org; semantic-web at W3C
Subject: Re: Representing vCard Objects in RDF (W3C Member Submission)

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Brian Peterson
<publicayers@verizon.net> wrote:
> I like the updates, but I always wondered why vCard doesn't include a
> relation that maps a person/org to their vcards. Or does it and I just
don't
> see it?
>
> I guess I also don't understand the approach outlined in the comments for
> VCard saying that the VCard URI could also be a URI for a person or
> organization. What's the point of having the VCard class if anything can
> have the dual role of being a vcard? I'd have thought that keeping people
> separate from vcards but providing a way of associating a person's vcards
to
> themselves would result in cleaner ontologies.
>

Well, there's a difference between "clean" ontologies and what people
actually do. Peter Mika from Yahoo! could step in with actual data,
but it appears most people apply hcards and vcard properties to people
or organizations directly, without an intervening (and often blank
node) for the "card" itself.

If someone wants to make a distinction that this particular URI is
actually a "card" or a "person" they can state that using FOAF.

Also, it's much easier to query without tooooo many layers of indirection.



> Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Renato Iannella
> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 9:45 PM
> To: public-xg-socialweb@w3.org; semantic-web at W3C
> Subject: Representing vCard Objects in RDF (W3C Member Submission)
>
>
> We are pleased to announce that an updated W3C Note for "Representing
vCard
> Objects in RDF" is now available:
>
>  http://www.w3.org/Submission/2010/SUBM-vcard-rdf-20100120
>
> This W3C Member Submission merges the original W3C Note [1] with the later
> "An ontology for vCards" [2] to produce a unified approach to RDF vCard
> expression.
>
> The W3C Team has also produced some comments on the Submission [3].
>
> Cheers...  Renato Iannella (for the Authors)
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-vcard-rdf-20010222/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns-2006.html
> [3] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2010/01/Comment/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 11 February 2010 01:06:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:34 GMT