- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:36:34 -0500
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
To make the graph labelled enough for doing a diff,[1], with calendar data, here are the fixes I had to make (a copy of) to the ontology: 1. One needs to identify the calendar itself - I suggest by giving an inverse functional property (IFP) :publishedAs <http://whatever/...>. This allows one to say which calendar has changed. It is also useful information. 2. Same problem with a alarms - I suggest adding an alarm id as evolution does, a functional property. 3. tzid is tricky. When used to in a timezone definition it acts as a an identifier of the timezone, but then the tzid property turns up on the events too. This implies that they are all timezones, if we make tzid an ifp. Solution: instead of timething :tzid "whatver"; write timething :timezone [ :tzid "whatver" ] where timezone is FP and tzid is IFP. This does the right thing With these changes, a file like http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/test/delta/ical/patch.n3 can be generated from an old calendar http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/test/delta/ical/from.n3 and a new calendar http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/test/delta/ical/to.n3 and the patch (a) makes sense when you look at it and (b) can be used to regenerate the new file given the old file and (c) won't accidentally patch the wrong thing in the case where the calendar being patched has extra triples from other (consistent) information received. Could the calendar ontology folks please make the changes? I think that sync is really important for calendars, and it needs. (The fact that this makes this OWL full. That does not worry me personally, but if there is a conflict then this makes it a point of discussion, I suppose.) Tim
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 16:36:41 UTC