W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-calendar@w3.org > April 2004

Re: places and lists of coordinates [was: priority bug, to libbyand dan]

From: Masahide Kanzaki <post@kanzaki.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 16:59:47 +0900
Message-Id: <p04320400bc9c0852589d@[[192.168.0.4]]>
To: www-rdf-calendar@w3.org

At 0:22 PM -0500 04.4.8, Dan Connolly wrote:
>On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 10:40, Masahide Kanzaki wrote:
>[...]
>
>> So, I think it's not good idea to define ical:geo as the list of floats.
>
>I can see your point, but I'm not yet convinced. What would you prefer?
>
>> Remember, we also want to use RDFical vocabulary with other vocab, such as
>> RSS, FOAF or even XHTML. Strict round trip .ics <-> RDFical is only
>> relevant when RDFical is generated from iCalendar, and doesn't make much
>> sense when the vocab is used in, say, FOAF file.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be enough to say something like 'when converted from .ics,
>> ical:geo should be expressed as the list of floats so that strict round
>> trip is possible' ?
>
>I don't think so... not without the sort of confusion discussed in
>  http://esw.w3.org/topic/ThingsVersusTheirNames
>
>Either the range of ical:geo is a list of floats
>or a place. RFC2445 says it's a list of floats. I wouldn't have
>done it that way, but they did. Similarly, ical:location takes
>a string value.

I agree. How about assigning place (spatialThing) as the range of ical:geo
? This makes it clear that ical:geo should be used to describe place as a
resource, not its name. Both list of floats and geo:lat/long can be
properties of that resource. And, notes on round trip stay the same...


>It's straightforward to relate the place to the list of floats ala:
>
>{ ?E ical:geo (?LAT ?LONG) } <=>
>  { ?E cyc:eventOccursAt [ geo:lat ?LAT; geo:lon ?LONG ] }.
>
>and it's straightforward to relate a place to its name:
>
>{ ?E ical:location ?PLACENAME } <=>
>  { ?E cyc:eventOccursAt [ rdfs:label ?PLACENAME ] }.

Sure. It's simple if we give up to use ical:geo to describe place with
other vocabularies. But is this what most of us desire ?

regards,

-- 
KANZAKI, Masahide a.k.a. masaka
http://kanzaki.com/info/webwho.rdf
mailto:webmaster(at)kanzaki.com
#Please use above address for a personal mail
#instead of post@kanzaki.com, which is for list only.
Received on Friday, 9 April 2004 04:04:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:14:12 UTC