Re: Concerning iCal in RDF

Hi All,

I would be also happy to see iCal being cleared up as well, especially 
the basic things like the namespace issue (2002/12/cal/ical# vs 
2002/12/cal/icaltzd#). Currently it is also fairly non-ontological for 
my taste, e.g. using literals for days of week. I understand that as 
usual there is a trade-off between following the original spec vs. 
ontologizing. (Another example: locations as literals versus resources.)

Martin Hepp might be interested to get involved, because he worked on 
opening hours in GoodRelations. Tom Heath and myself also worked on an 
'availability vocabulary', see [1], which could also be used for 
inspiration.

Personally, I don't have much time to get involved... but I'm happy to 
comment on any drafts that might come out.

Cheers,
Peter

[1] http://tomheath.com/tmp/availability.ttl

Renato Iannella wrote:
> On 17 Feb 2010, at 23:30, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
>
>   
>> Great, thanks a million! I guess we can do it in the same way as you did
>> with vCard. I expect only minor editorial things (mainly: defining the
>> namespace URI) while keeping essentially DanC's original W3C Note [1] and
>> maybe adding the TC, as suggested.
>>     
>
> I think that [1] is more of a discussion document - so I think a new document is needed that, like vCard RDF, simply states "here is how you do it".... IETF iCal into RDF/OWL.
>
>   
>> How shall we proceed? Initial skype call, see who is up to it? Would you lead this?
>>     
>
> Happy to "help" out not lead ;-)
>
> Cheers...  Renato Iannella
> NICTA
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 18 February 2010 10:14:33 UTC