W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2013

Re: vCard Ontology MD questions

From: Renato Iannella <ri@semanticidentity.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:14:50 +1000
Cc: "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "Rolschewski, Johann" <Johann.Rolschewski@sbb.spk-berlin.de>, "'Adrian Pohl' (pohl@hbz-nrw.de)" <pohl@hbz-nrw.de>, "Heise, Andreas" <Andreas.Heise@sbb.spk-berlin.de>, "voss@gbv.de" <voss@gbv.de>
Message-Id: <D7F25AAC-D8F4-466A-A143-856E5E00E8CF@semanticidentity.com>
To: "Klee, Carsten" <Carsten.Klee@sbb.spk-berlin.de>

On 25 Oct 2013, at 21:53, Klee, Carsten <Carsten.Klee@sbb.spk-berlin.de> wrote:

> This way addresses, contacts and locations could be related. But a vcard:hasContact property is still necessary. Actually a vcard:hasLocation property would also be useful

Hi Carsten, I can see the utility of having hasIndividual, hasOrganisation, hasLocation, and hasGroup properties for clearer relationships between the four vCard Kinds.

In some respects, hasContact is a short-cut for hasRelated to a Resource of type "Contact".
We could apply the same idea to the 20 relationship types [1]. Hence we could also have a hasAgent property, and even a hasSweetheart (my favourite ;-)


Cheers...
Renato Iannella
Semantic Identity
http://semanticidentity.com
Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf/#Code_Sets
Received on Monday, 28 October 2013 02:15:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:35 UTC