- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetilk@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:04:27 +0200
- To: foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org
- Cc: public-powderwg@w3.org
Hi all! [/me taking his work hat on] The POWDER W3C WG [1] has used several properties and classes of FOAF in examples, and during the group's F2F in Boston in January, it was resolved that the group prefers to continue to do so. However, a concern was raised about the stability of FOAF. While FOAF is widespread, the community has not clearly expressed a commitment to its stability, it is felt. Now, danbri blogged about exactly that [2], and the response from the POWDER group, and others I believe, is "yes"; we would strongly welcome that the community declares a commitment to keep some parts of the vocabulary stable, depending on the needs of the FOAF community as well as other standardisation efforts. We have used stuff like foaf:Organisation and foaf:maker, but the POWDER group could come up with a list of things we need, and I'd answer danbri's call and volunteer to help with stabilising things. Shall we get started? [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/ [2] http://danbri.org/words/2006/09/23/158 Cheers, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Semantic Web Specialist Opera Software ASA
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2007 10:57:30 UTC