Re: ActivityStreams Schema: Hierarchy of Types

On 11/09/2014 11:01 PM, Owen Shepherd wrote:
> ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
>> On 11/08/2014 12:43 AM, Owen Shepherd wrote:
>>>> 07 November 2014 23:03
>>>> It's highly disappointing to me to see this working group continue
>>>> to run away from the existing vocabulary projects out there and work
>>>> to define it's own vocab. There is so much important work to be done
>>>> surrounding use cases, yet this group is literally back to square 0,
>>>> defining vocabs.
>> [...]
>>> You cite exclusively, which we have excluded for the
>>> following reasons:
>>>   1. is not produced by any standards organization, nor does
>>>      it have any defined open contributor model. While t he organizations
>>>      behind do accept contributions, they hold veto powers
>>>      over any modifications
>>>   2. alone is not sufficient for our use cases
>>>   3. Several of us find the technical quality of lacking. The
>>>      design of contains numerous things which are illogical
>>>      and badly designed.
>> If by saying "we have excluded" you refer to Social WG, could you please
>> provide an archive link to such RESOLUTION?
> I don't believe there has been any formal resolution on the matter (nor
> any call for one), but that is certainly the "rough working consensus"
> that I've gotten). There are certainly a number of members who are
> likely to -1 any motion which makes us dependent upon
> (something something Tantek something something volcanoes with fax
> numbers, for one)
While I find full consensus a great situation AFAIK we don't have to
always reach it!

I do see currently more resistance to using, but still would
like to stay clear that we didn't make any formal decision on it!

TL;DR please skip all the rest if you can't handle any more discussions
about Volcanoes 'having' faxes and open/closed world assumption.

While schema:Volcano can list faxNumber, if you define as:Person
rdfs:subClassOf as:Object then it can list inReplyTo, validAfter,
rating, duration, provider, generator and even resultOf :D

I assume that you keep in mind difference in classes and properties
between OOP and RDF! Just in case, a nice explanation available in

"In Linked Data, properties are, just as everything else, identified by
IRIs and thus have global scope which implies that they have independent
semantics. In contrast, properties in data models as used in common
programming languages are class-dependent. Their semantics depend on the
class they belong to. In data models classes are typically described by
the properties they expose whereas in Linked Data properties define to
which classes they belong. If no class is specified, it is assumed that
a property may apply to every class.

These differences have interesting consequences. For example, the
commonly asked question of which properties can be applied to an
instance of a specific class can typically not be answered for Linked
Data. Strictly speaking, any property which is not explicitly forbidden
could be applied. This stems from the fact that Linked Data works under
an open-world assumption whereas data models used by programmers
typically work under a closed-world assumption. The difference is that
when a closed world is assumed, everything that is not known to be true
is false or vice-versa. With an open-world assumption the failure to
derive a fact does not automatically imply the opposite; it embraces the
fact that the knowledge is incomplete."


Received on Sunday, 9 November 2014 22:45:45 UTC