- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
- Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 20:22:38 +0200
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
On Tuesday 01 May 2007 18:10, you wrote: > This is RDF---you parse > in all nodes of an RDF graph, whether you understand all of it or > not. In fact, with RDF you can round-trip without understanding a bit > of it. Sure, but to non-RDFers, especially hcard users, it is useful to know what you need to understand to have a sufficient implementation to do a round-trip with hcard. > But that doesn't mean the ontology can't be complete, and cover all > the information that non-RDF vCard would support. I'm strongly > against different subsets of the ontology. In my opinion this would > make understanding the spec harder and impede adoption because of the > proliferation of variations. Actually, I am of the exact opposite opinion, but based on the same arguments... :-) I think it would make the spec much easier to understand, aid adoption by explicitly telling people what they would need to implement in the simplest case, and as long as the subsets of the core and full are disjoint but the union of them makes up the whole vCard, there is no variations to talk about -- there are just two namespace URIs instead of one, that's all. Best, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Programmer / Astrophysicist / Ski-orienteer / Orienteer / Mountaineer kjetil@kjernsmo.net Homepage: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/ OpenPGP KeyID: 6A6A0BBC
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 18:22:18 UTC