W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2005

Re: Tag ontology RFC

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 22:18:27 +0100
Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd0503251318acbad1e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
Cc: Seth Russell <russell.seth@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org

Richard, I just looked again at the sketch you posted earlier, it
hadn't sunk in first time around that you were talking of the tags
being up there as concept classes. Not sure how I managed to
misconstrue. Whatever, looking again it not only makes sense, but also
should lend itself to fairly straightforward implementation and
support nice interop with class-oriented inference. With a bit of luck
;-)

Seth:
> > I would say that Tagging is a sub class of Items.

Hmm, I've wondered about reusing Items in a few place, I suspect it's
a mixed blessing - it makes syndication a doddle but then if you need
to separate non-tag Items for whatever reason, it won't be such fun.
For an idea I'm playing with at the moment I've got to-do items (class
ToDo), which will mostly comprise a resource with a dc:description (or
somesuch). I'm planning on leaving them more or less that until I want
to do things like syndication. At which time I'm hoping to insert a
triple into the local model (which will already contain Items) saying
that ToDo is a subclass of Item, infer their itemsness and pull a
combined feed out from there. Thing is, in every other context that
schema-ing triple won't be around, so querying should be easier. Might
work ;-)

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 

http://dannyayers.com
Received on Friday, 25 March 2005 21:18:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:44:52 UTC