- From: Daniel Rubin <rubin@med.stanford.edu>
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:13:56 -0800
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Cc: public-swd-wg@w3.org,William Bug <William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>
Dan, Thanks for the follow up. I'm copying Bill Bug, who is the person who reported the SKOS/FOAF problem, so he can reply to your questions below. The tool being used is Protege. Thanks Daniel At 10:46 AM 2/26/2007, Dan Brickley wrote: >Thanks. It certainly ought to be the case that FOAF and SKOS work >well together. If someone is having trouble, I would like to find out why. > >That said, I am having trouble understanding the detail of the message. > >http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/20050603.rdf is an archive-only snapshot >of FOAF's RDF description, never intended for use as a namespace. >Well, people are free to do so, but it would be excessively cautious >usage, I think. > >It soulds like they are using some particular toolset. Do you have >any more details? > >For example, http://www.dasbistro.com/~sam/raptor.lisp seems to be >fixing on that specific URI. > >http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.misc.ontology.protege.owl/19596 >suggests that URI is being used in Protege circles. > >Could you ask if http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/index.rdf works OK for them? > >Perhaps the problem is with our content negotiation setup. That >could well be the case. If you can find out what tool is being used, >I could run some tests...
Received on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 04:14:14 UTC