On 5 Feb 2013 11:03, "Gregg Kellogg" <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote: > > On Feb 5, 2013, at 10:49 AM, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: > > > I noticed that Manu and Dave have been replacing most uses of FOAF in the > > examples with Schema.org. On one hand, I find that good since probably more > > people know about schema.org than about FOAF. On the other hand I find it > > strange to use IRIs which do not resolve to anything useful when being > > dereferenced; in fact, you'll get a 404. > > I think using schema.org makes it more relevant to developers. The fact that dereferencing a predicate IRI results in a 404 is a temporary issue, which I believe DanBri is addressing. So, in the long run, it shouldn't be an issue. Yes, making per-property pages is on my list... Dan > Gregg > > > I thus wanted to hear opinions of other people in the group regarding what > > we should use in our examples. Since we are talking about Linked Data and > > have statements in the spec that IRIs SHOULD resolve to something useful I > > think we should live what we preach and use FOAF instead. > > > > > > Cheers, > > Markus > > > > > > -- > > Markus Lanthaler > > @markuslanthaler > > > > > >Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 20:32:06 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:36 UTC