RE: Representing vCard Objects in RDF (W3C Member Submission)

Thanks Michael -- its perfect for what I wanted!  I'll start using it. I
like that ov:businessCard has no rdfs:domain assertion.

Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Michael Hausenblas
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 4:48 AM
To: Brian Peterson
Cc: public-xg-socialweb@w3.org; Semantic Web community
Subject: Re: Representing vCard Objects in RDF (W3C Member Submission)


Brian,

> I like the updates, but I always wondered why vCard doesn't include a
> relation that maps a person/org to their vcards.

Yup, this is something I found as well sort of funny. My approach was to
simply come up with such a prop ov:businessCard [1] as I wanted to use it in
my FOAF file [2] ... surely with the hope that it gets picked up by some
'official' standard ;)

Luckily, back then I picked the right namespace for the range of
ov:businessCard, so I guess it's safe to use it.

Cheers,
      Michael

[1] http://open.vocab.org/terms/businessCard
[2] http://sw-app.org/mic.xhtml

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html



> From: Brian Peterson <publicayers@verizon.net>
> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:55:17 -0500
> To: Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>, <public-xg-socialweb@w3.org>,
> 'semantic-web at W3C' <semantic-web@w3c.org>
> Subject: RE: Representing vCard Objects in RDF (W3C Member Submission)
> Resent-From: <public-xg-socialweb@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:56:06 +0000
> 
> I like the updates, but I always wondered why vCard doesn't include a
> relation that maps a person/org to their vcards. Or does it and I just
don't
> see it?
> 
> I guess I also don't understand the approach outlined in the comments for
> VCard saying that the VCard URI could also be a URI for a person or
> organization. What's the point of having the VCard class if anything can
> have the dual role of being a vcard? I'd have thought that keeping people
> separate from vcards but providing a way of associating a person's vcards
to
> themselves would result in cleaner ontologies.
> 
> Brian 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Renato Iannella
> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 9:45 PM
> To: public-xg-socialweb@w3.org; semantic-web at W3C
> Subject: Representing vCard Objects in RDF (W3C Member Submission)
> 
> 
> We are pleased to announce that an updated W3C Note for "Representing
vCard
> Objects in RDF" is now available:
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/Submission/2010/SUBM-vcard-rdf-20100120
> 
> This W3C Member Submission merges the original W3C Note [1] with the later
> "An ontology for vCards" [2] to produce a unified approach to RDF vCard
> expression.
> 
> The W3C Team has also produced some comments on the Submission [3].
> 
> Cheers...  Renato Iannella (for the Authors)
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-vcard-rdf-20010222/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns-2006.html
> [3] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2010/01/Comment/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 11 February 2010 14:57:42 UTC