Re: action status type

On 11/01/2014 06:13 PM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> On 11/02/2014 12:03 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> It appears to me that if you use part of you are going to be
>> actually using quite a bit of  As you may know, I am not a
>> fan of several of the choices (and apparent choices) made in,
>> so I would advise caution in using any part of

> How do you see
> ?

I don't see how to understand this document without having access to the 
Activity Streams 2.0 Core document.  After quite a bit of work, I found what 
appears to be an editors' draft of that document at

One very strange aspect of these documents is that they appear to be trying to 
create a formal model for activities.  However, they use quite a variety of 
semi-formal concepts for this purpose.  Why not just use a formal modelling 
system for this purpose?  You wouldn't have to use RDF or OWL if these systems 
are in a great disfavour in the working group.

> You may also need to take a look at

I'm not sure what this document is for, and I'm certainly not sure what line 
477 of the document is for.

> Have you by any chance compiled your observations about into
> an article published somewhere online?

I have a paper at the recent ISWC conference that discusses some issues that I 
see in  It is already somewhat dated, as has added 
significant new representational facilities in the last few months.  The paper 
is available at

> Especially I would like to
> understand better what do you mean by "if you use part of you
> are going to be actually using quite a bit of" has typed properties.  The properties on actions immediately get 
you into several of the other major parts of the taxonomy, 
including Person, Organization, and Place. has quite a number of representational aspects.  The properties on 
actions immediately get you into a number of these, including disjunctive 
ranges.  Using actions quickly gets you into potential actions, 
i.e., using objects as quasi-concepts, and input/output constraints, i.e., 
using magic properties to constrain other properties.  Some aspects of, e.g, strings a things, come along with any use of

Maybe all that you want to do is to use some of the vocabulary that 
uses.  If that is all that is reused, then maybe you won't get the rest of  But if all you want is some vocabulary terms to reuse, 
is probably a poor choice.  Consider, for example, - 
a medical physical examination of the abdomen.  Other examples occur within 
the action vocabulary, including

> I'll also try to dig in | Results
> : 111 (for your email address)


Received on Sunday, 2 November 2014 17:46:38 UTC