- From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 01:47:01 +0100
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>, public-socialweb@w3.org
- Message-ID: <54D80385.6010703@wwelves.org>
On 02/08/2015 05:10 PM, Harry Halpin wrote: > On 02/06/2015 11:58 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote: >> Ahoy o/ > >> I think we could try document this topic somewhere on a wiki. In >> recent conversation on github with Erik[1] we stumbled upon again >> on topic of conceptual model used in Activity Streams 2.0 >> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_Syntax_RDF > >> Personally I don't see conflict between JSON and RDF mostly thanks >> to availability of JSON-LD. Currently AS2.0 not only uses JSON-LD >> but AS2.0 Vocabulary also takes advantage of RDFS and even OWL. >> Since we clearly reuse established conceptual model, maybe we could >> clarify and document adopted aspects? > > I think the charter is clear: It's JSON-based. Any use of RDF(S) or > OWL inference is fine or alternative serializations is fine, but > should not be required (and thus non-normative). Let's try to clarify if further! Do you say that we can use rdfs:subClassOf but can not use it as formal way to say that one can consider an individual in given sub class also an individual in its super class? BTW I looked lately on RDFa Vocabulary Expansion http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_vocab_expansion RDFa Vocabulary Entailmen looks pretty lightweight http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_vocab_entailment rdf:type rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf owl:equivalentClass owl:equivalentProperty As you see it doesn't even use rdfs:domain and rdfs:range (which possibly Tantek may start reinventing now http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/35 ;)
Received on Monday, 9 February 2015 00:47:36 UTC