Re: as:Like (a rdfs:Class) or as:like (a rdf:Property) ?

Hello,

I should have chance in next days to discuss this issue with people
working on xAPI, please also notice creation of
EXPERIENCE API (XAPI) VOCABULARY & SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY COMMUNITY GROUP
* https://www.w3.org/community/xapivocabulary/

Today, during xAPI Vocabulary call, Tom De Nies explained his work on
http://tincan2prov.org

In accompanying presentation, you can find diagram where *completed*
verb appears as label of an edge. Which looks to me like rdf:Property
see Slide 9
*
http://www.slideshare.net/tdenies/20150519-tom-de-nies-tin-can2prov-exposing-interoperable-provenance-of-learning-processes-through-experience-api-logs

I still need to catch up with AS2.0 going CR thread but I think we
should consider this possible non trivial change before deciding to go
into CR...

Cheers!


On 07/20/2015 02:53 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> (cc: IG Vocabulary TF)
> 
> I would like to bring this topic to our attention right away, since it
> may require non trivial change to current AS2 drafts.
> 
> Currently we use sub classes of as:Activity for 'verbs', I see various
> benefits of using properties instead. Some prior conversations where I
> argued quite opposite:
> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/23
> 
> My reflection come in big part from drawing diagrams representing graphs
> with social data, for example:
> 
> * https://github.com/w3c-social/social-vocab/tree/master/activity/Follow
> * https://github.com/w3c-social/social-vocab/tree/master/activity/Subscribe
> 
> As we see, to use direct relations (not qualified relations) we still
> need predicates like: *follows*, *subscribes*, *likes*, *attends* etc.
> 
> BTW I don't even pay attention now to what seems like a minor detail
> follow/follows/followed like/likes/liked etc.
> 
> It could possibly work much simpler to define verbs as
> properties/predicates and just use them directly
> 
> {
>   "@context": [
>     "http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
>     "v": "http://w3id.org/verb/#"
>    ],
>   "@id": "https://wwelves.org/perpetual-tripper",
>   "v:follow": [
>     "https://aaronparecki.com/",
>   ],
>   "v:subscribes": [
>     "https://aaronparecki.com/metrics",
>   ],
>   "v:attend": [
>     "https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-07-21",
>   ]
> }
> 
> As for today, I don't see example of how to show 'who likes this
> posting' - (similar to
> https://developers.facebook.com/docs/graph-api/reference/v2.3/object/likes)
> 
> I will prepare another example with an event, which will require linking
> to collections of agents (actors) via edges: invite, subscribe, attend,
> host, sponsor etc.
> (similar to
> https://developers.facebook.com/docs/graph-api/reference/v2.3/event#edges)
> 
> Since we don't use (at least as normative) rdfs:domain and rdfs:range,
> defining more specific sub classes of as:Activity doesn't seem to offer
> any benefit.
> 
> Some examples where actions/activities seems get used in a way that
> would fit defining them as properties not classes:
> 
> * http://adlnet.gov/expapi/verbs
> * http://indiewebcamp.com/webactions#action_do_verbs
> * http://microformats.org/wiki/h-listing#Properties (p-action)
> * http://microformats.org/wiki/h-entry#Draft_Properties
> * https://developer.github.com/v3/activity/events/types/
> 
> I don't see any agenda for tomorrow yet, maybe we could all think about
> it and have short initial discussion about pros and cons of those two
> different approaches tomorrow?
> 
> Cheers!
>