- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:21:45 -0500
- To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
On 1/25/11 8:01 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote: > Very interesting stuff, but... > > Sorry Bernard, I agree very much with Chris here. > > The name meant little to me as "Vocabularies of a Friend". Hmm. Is it the Name or Description that's important? > In fact I think it misled me - I immediately assumed it was to do with representing information about people (as FOAF), and it took me quite a while to challenge that assumption when I looked at the pages (that is, it actually inhibited my understanding). But what about discerning meaning from the VOAF graph? > And the tag line doesn't tell me much more. > And clearly I am not the only one. > But isn't this whole Linked Data gig about doing away with superficial literal monikers when actual meaning is a graph de-ref away? > I don't know whether pronouncing things as acronyms (ie words, not initials) is a peculiarly English language thing, but that is what happens. > VOAF is too mistakable for FOAF (in fact I find myself sub-vocalizing it as FOAF, as FOAF is so familiar to me). > And when I think of how, for example, a native Spaniard or Japanese would pronounce VOAF and FOAF when speaking English, I find it hard to imagine always detecting the difference. > Simply because it is an homage to another vocabulary that might have a similar structure or abstract purpose doesn't mean that it is a good thing to do. > And I am not at all sure that getting Dan's stamp of approval is really the commit point! > > Quite often names really are important. Depends on realm, in our human realm we are still de-referencing a graph and making sense of it. VOAF exists in human and machine comprehensible forms. > Perhaps getting this feedback early on will prove really valuable? > As I say, a really interesting activity in an important area, and sorry to give my 2 centimes worth on the name. Have you moved to the next step i.e., looking at the VOAF graph and seeking what it delivers? :-) Happy New Year! Kingsley > Best > Hugh > > On 19 Jan 2011, at 23:29, Bernard Vatant wrote: > > Hi Christopher > > I can't help but feel that calling it VOAF is just going to muddy the waters. "Friendly vocabularies for the linked data Web" > doesn't help clarify either. It's cute, but I strongly suggest you at the very least make this 'tag line' far more clear. > > I agree the current documentation is too sketchy and potentially misleading as is. I have put efforts mainly on the dataset itself so far, but you're right it has to be better documented. > > Regarding the name, well, the pun is here to stay I'm afraid. I've had positive feedback from Dan Brickley about it, so I already feel it's too late to change now. > > Frankly calling something 'voaf' when people will hear it mixed in with 'foaf' is just making the world more confusing. > > Actually I've not thought much (not at all) about how people would pronounce or hear it. I principally communicate with vocabularies (and people using them) through written stuff, and very rarely speak about them. I barely know how to pronounce OWL, and always feel like a fool when I've to, and will eventually spell it O.W.L. - as every other french native would do. If I had to speak about VOAF, I think I would spell it also V.O.A.F. > > I had a lot of confusion until I found out the "SHOCK" vocab people were talking about was spelled SIOC. > > Interesting, I was confused exactly the other way round. I've read a lot (and written a bit) about SIOC since it's been around, but realized only two days ago how it was pronounced when I actually heard someone "speaking" about it the "right" way ... and thought at first time it was something else. > Me too! > I knew about them both, and took a while to realise they were the same thing :-) > > One other minor suggestion; > Vocabulary<http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/browser/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mondeca.com%2Ffoaf%2Fvoaf%23Vocabulary#http://www.mondeca.com/foaf/voaf%23Vocabulary> → rdfs:subClassOf<http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/browser/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2F01%2Frdf-schema%23subClassOf#http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema%23subClassOf> → void:Dataset<http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/browser/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Frdfs.org%2Fns%2Fvoid%23Dataset#http://rdfs.org/ns/void%23Dataset> > > might be a mistake because void:Dataset is defined as "A set of RDF triples that are published, maintained or aggregated by a single provider." > > Not a bug, but a feature. It's exactly what a voaf:Vocabulary is. > > and it may be that you would want to define non RDF vocabs using this. > > You might want to do that but I don't and I'm the vocabulary creator (right?) so I can insist on the fact that this is really meant to describe *RDF* vocabularies, and cast this intention in the stone of formal semantics. > If you want to describe other kind of vocabularies the same way, feel free to use or create something else. Or extend foaf:Vocabulary to a more generic class. It's an open world, let thousand flowers blossom :) > > I see no value in making this restriction. > > The value I see is to keep this vocabulary use focused on what it was meant for. > > Best > > Bernard > > -- > Bernard Vatant > Senior Consultant > Vocabulary& Data Engineering > Tel: +33 (0) 971 488 459 > Mail: bernard.vatant@mondeca.com<mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> > ---------------------------------------------------- > Mondeca > 3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France > Web: http://www.mondeca.com<http://www.mondeca.com/> > Blog: http://mondeca.wordpress.com<http://mondeca.wordpress.com/> > ---------------------------------------------------- > > -- > Hugh Glaser, > Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia > School of Electronics and Computer Science, > University of Southampton, > Southampton SO17 1BJ > Work: +44 23 8059 3670, Fax: +44 23 8059 3045 > Mobile: +44 78 9422 3822, Home: +44 23 8061 5652 > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~hg/ > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Tuesday, 25 January 2011 16:22:14 UTC