Re: vCard - Old vs. New?

And of course, since yesterday, we have to take Google's vcard ontology 
into account:

http://rdf.data-vocabulary.org/rdf.xml

Cheers,
Peter

Harry Halpin wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au> wrote:
>   
>> On 12 May 2009, at 18:39, Dan Brickley wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> If others amongst you will be there, why don't you get together and try
>>> to make some progress there? I suggest the Social Web XG as a mechanism
>>> for tracking this effort, even if the document surfaces as a SWIG Note,
>>> since SWXG meets regularly with minutes, agendas etc while SWIG doesn't
>>> have that kind of a mechanism. Enough SWIG folk are engaged in this
>>> discussion (now and over the years) that I don't see a problem with
>>> doing the update under SWIG.
>>>       
>
> I'll be at Heraklion for ESWC2009, and also of courese in SWXG. Would
> like to merge, will have to re-read both vCard Notes and try to see
> what way they can be combined. Off the top of my head,  it appears the
> first Note demonstrates the use of RDF containers, while the second
> aims for simplicity. We could just aim for simplicity while still
> showing how RDF containers can be used to help deal with the complex
> cases. The main keys will be to normalise property names and deal with
> any actual incompatibilities, which I assume are few.
>
>   
>> Great ... see u there!
>>
>> Cheers...  Renato Iannella
>> NICTA
>>
>>
>>
>>