Re: Agentic Linked Data

IMHO, ontologists would argue that the definitions for linked data should use the FOAF ontology for the definition of most “general” classes and stick to corresponding definitions …

 

http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_Agent

http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_Person

 

The Person class is a sub-class of the Agent class, since all people are considered 'agents' in FOAF.

 

FOAF also defines Organisation as a type of agent. Other ontologies extend into Automatons/etc. 

 

Others like DCAT bind Dublin Core and FOAF:

 

dcat:resource has a property dcmi:creator with a range of foaf:Agent.

 

___________ ________________________

Joshua Cornejo

marketdata

smart authorisation management for the AI-era

 

From: Frederick Gibson <frederick@graphmetrix.com>
Reply-To: <frederick@graphmetrix.com>
Date: Sunday 12 January 2025 at 18:27
To: Josh Cornejo <josh@marketdata.md>
Cc: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Jesse Wright <jesse.wright@jesus.ox.ac.uk>, public-solid <public-solid@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Agentic Linked Data

 

“Though Tim noted he’d be wary of something calling itself both a Person and an Agent!”

 

If we look at the OED definition of agent:

 

"A person who or thing which acts upon someone or something; one who or that which exerts power; the doer of an action. Sometimes contrasted with the patient (instrument, etc.) undergoing the action."

 

"A person who acts as a substitute for another; one who undertakes negotiations or transactions on behalf of a superior, employer, or principal; a deputy, steward, representative; (in early use) an ambassador, emissary. Also figurative. Now chiefly in legal contexts."

 

By definition, a person can be both type person and type agent, just as a person can have countless types depending on the state of a person at a given time.  And given that "thing which..that which" is included in the first definition, it would be consistent that any system could be an agent acting on behalf of another system (whether artificial or organic), not just people as agents.

 

Fred Gibson

Founder & CEO

mobile: 415.335.8232

 

1255 Treat Blvd, Suite 300
PMB#4611

Walnut Creek, CA  94597

office: 925.940.0741

 

 

 

 

 

---- On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 09:25:59 -0800 Josh Cornejo <josh@marketdata.md> wrote ---

 

 

“Though Tim noted he’d be wary of something calling itself both a Person and an Agent!”

 

 ODRL has a :isA operator to work around these type of validation/specialisation semantics. (Equivalent to typecasting in programming)

 

 

 

___________________________________

Joshua Cornejo

marketdata

smart authorisation management for the AI-era

 

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2025 4:26 pm
To: Jesse Wright <jesse.wright@jesus.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: public-solid <public-solid@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Agentic Linked Data

 

 

 

so 28. 12. 2024 v 12:34 odesílatel Jesse Wright <jesse.wright@jesus.ox.ac.uk> napsal:

Hi Melvin,

 

Have you come across the Web Agents CG https://www.w3.org/community/webagents/ - there are several people working in that direction there.

 

Hi Jesse,

Thanks for pointing out the Web Agents CG. Yes, I’ve been a member since its inception—an excellent group!

Quick note, as not all responses made it to the mailing list over the holidays. I used an LLM to summarize some key points:

Summary of the Discussion on Agentic Linked Data

Participants
Melvin Carvalho: Initiated the discussion.
Joshua Cornejo: Experienced in ODRL and authorization architecture.
Eric Jahn: Interested in agent roles and permissions.
Aad Versteden: Integrates AI and Linked Data in semantic.works.
Sindhu Raju: Focuses on personal data management and consumer use cases.
Matt Taylor: Consultant in ethical tech, cautious about broad agentic access.
Ram Mukund Kripa: Developed privacy agents for consent management.
Jesse Wright: Highlighted the Web Agents CG.
Jacob Beauchamp: Exploring agentic learning and entity data.
There’s clear interest in moving this forward. I also mentioned Agentic Linked Data on the SolidOS call, where the idea (of agents) was well received. For context, TimBL’s “timblbot” illustrates prior work:
https://timblbot.inrupt.net/profile/card#me
Classes include:
schema:Person, schema:SoftwareApplication, foaf:Agent, foaf:Person, prov:SoftwareAgent.
(Though Tim noted he’d be wary of something calling itself both a Person and an Agent!)

Next steps: We’re probably too small for a standalone Community Group. A practical option might be to work within the Solid CG for now, with a dedicated chat area for agentic topics. Initial work items could include adapting Agent entities to existing Solid tooling, libraries, pods, servers, and apps.

Looking forward to further discussion and collaboration!

Best,
Melvin

 

 

Best,

Jesse 

 

Get Outlook for Android

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2024 11:11:09 AM
To: public-solid <public-solid@w3.org>
Subject: Agentic Linked Data 

 

Hi All,

When I started this group, it was with the idea that Solid = Social Linked Data. Solid's foundation on WebID ties it to the concept of "Agent," based on FOAF's Agent class (parent of FOAF Person).

With "agentic AI" really taking off right now, I wonder—would anyone be interested in exploring "Agentic Linked Data"? It feels like a natural direction.

Best,

Melvin

 

___________________________________

Joshua Cornejo

marketdata

smart authorisation management for the AI-era