W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2012

Re: 'parallel properties' reference?

From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:21:26 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGR+nnFT57_xbZPqmh5Mi7++EC=PY_EvviXUnusj2gBCSszQLg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, www-tag@w3.org, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

>  On 11/21/2012 12:17 AM, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:
>
> Jonathan,
>
>  On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>wrote:
>
>> Cool!  Thanks to all of you (Stephane, David, Sandro) for all this
>> material. The approach was covered pretty poorly in my issue-57
>> writeup, will amend.
>>
>> The idea has come up with some favorable reception in a couple of TAG
>> discussions, so it's useful to have both the pro and con.
>>
>
>  For the records, could you indicate where the materials above were
> recorded and discussed by the TAG members? I'm curious to see what progress
> was made on the 'parallel properties' in relation to the other email I sent
> about mandating a particular type of URI deployment without an official
> httpRange-14 resolution.
>
>  Steph.
>
>
>>
>> Still not sure exactly what the Facebook connection is, but that
>> doesn't matter too much I guess.
>>
>>
> I'm coming into the side of this conversation -- I'm not following the TAG
> directly -- I've just had conversations about this with Jeni, Tim, and
> Stéphane recently.   (Sorry for disappearing yesterday, Stéphane.)  The
> reference for "parallel properties" that I know of is my original blog post
> and ISWC lightning talk slide:
>
> http://decentralyze.com/2010/11/10/simplified-rdf/
>
>  I'd approach it slightly differently now, but the basic idea is there.
> It came out of trying to handle Facebook's objection to RDF, which was that
> it was too hard for Web developers / Web authors to manage the distinctions
> between strings, datatyped values, URLs for web content, and IRIs denoting
> arbitrary resources.   In the design of the Open Graph Protocol they
> avoided making such distinction.   I thought about that, and realized it
> could still be seen as carrying the same information, if one just considers
> those distinctions embedded into the predicate.
>

Note that OGP isn't the only example (although it's the most widely
deployed currently), schema.org follows the same approach, e.g. using
http://schema.org/Person for a page about a person. cc'ing danbri.

Steph.


>
>     -- Sandro
>
>
>
>   Best
>> Jonathan
>>
>
>
>
>  --
> Steph.
>
>
>


-- 
Steph.
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2012 13:21:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 November 2012 13:21:55 GMT