Re: vcard:AddressBook

Thanks for the pointers Sarven!

I agree with Melvin though, if the people using the vcard ontology (we) are
unable to edit the vcard ontology, then that means that the tools are not
aligned in our favour.

If the answer to "how can I use the vcard ontology" is "don't use it, use a
different one", then that also doesn't really help us.

That repo https://github.com/w3c/ns/ you mentioned says it's not deployed,
and I can't find the source code of https://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf/ on
GitHub.

I also read https://github.com/w3c/ns/issues/2 (thanks for working on
that!) and maybe the conclusion is indeed that the W3C is not offering its
community groups sufficient tooling for evolving vocabularies?

Of course, I can host a vocabulary on https://michielbdejong.com/ns/ or on
https://solidproject.org/ns/ but that will create a walled garden without
interoperability.
We can also migrate away from W3C namespaced vocabularies to schema.org,
but that only works well if we migrate the entire vcard vocabulary (copy
and deprecate), so that all app developers end up at schema.org and we can
maintain inter-app interop.
Mixing (newer) predicates from one vocabulary onto classes from another one
soon becomes ugly and messy, and harder for the developer to stay
compatible with the RDF that other developers write.

I hope the W3C can offer us a workable solution for this, because to me
they feel like the most suitable organisation in the world to be the go-to
place for interoperable semantic web ontologies.

CC'ing vocab-services@w3.org to this thread, according to
https://www.w3.org/2016/08/namespaces/ they respond within two business
days, so let's wait for their instructions.

Cheers,
Michiel

On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 11:25, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> čt 6. 3. 2025 v 11:16 odesílatel Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
> napsal:
>
>> On 2025-03-06 10:04, Michiel de Jong wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > In the Solid CG we are using `vcard:AddressBook`, but it came to our
>> > attention that this class is not defined in
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-
>> > rdf/ <https://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf/>.
>> >
>> > The document says:
>> >  > If you wish to make comments regarding this document, please send
>> > them to semantic-web@w3.org <mailto:semantic-web@w3.org>>
>> >
>> > We have documented/used `vcard:AddressBook` in the following places:
>> > * https://pdsinterop.org/conventions/addressbook/ <https://
>> > pdsinterop.org/conventions/addressbook/>
>> > * https://github.com/SolidOS/contacts-pane/blob/
>> > ae1819676bb19a2b0cc7a02b4417c96751ff5297/mintNewAddressBook.js#L60-L75
>> > <https://github.com/SolidOS/contacts-pane/blob/
>> > ae1819676bb19a2b0cc7a02b4417c96751ff5297/mintNewAddressBook.js#L60-L75>
>> > * https://github.com/solid-contrib/data-modules/blob/
>> > d732671f5c5a37b9748ce90bf3220e2e36336d8f/contacts/src/rdflib/
>> > ContactsModuleRdfLib.ts#L48 <https://github.com/solid-contrib/data-
>> > modules/blob/d732671f5c5a37b9748ce90bf3220e2e36336d8f/contacts/src/
>> > rdflib/ContactsModuleRdfLib.ts#L48>
>> >
>> > How can we go about adding `vcard:AddressBook` to the vCard
>> ontology, or
>> > what would be the best way forward here?
>> >
>> >
>> > Many thanks,
>> > Michiel de Jong
>> > Co-chair
>> > Solid CG
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> Michiel, best to check directly with W3C Team.
>>
>> You may want to look at Solid CG's Contribution Guidelines:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/w3c-cg/solid/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#vocabulary-management
>>
>> and perhaps more specifically the referenced:
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/2016/08/namespaces/
>>
>> That's roughly the most reasonable path considering that the SW IG is
>> closed. Other changes (additions or errata) were done in the same way to
>> vocabularies that are no longer maintained by a W3C Group or a BG/CG.
>>
>> So, propose the actual changes somewhere, e.g.,
>> https://github.com/solid/vocab or perhaps https://github.com/w3c/ns/
>> (although that's not where development on vcard happens), and then
>> signal the wider community (as you've done with this mailing list) for
>> review.
>>
>> BTW, AFAIK, the use of missing vcard:AddressBook was initially raised in:
>>
>> https://github.com/solid/type-indexes/issues/35
>
>
> If we want to effectively build apps, we need to be able to evolve vocabs
> in a more agile way than this.
>
> I was thinking about this very problem yesterday.
>
> My conclusion was to make something, similar to, schema.org for Solid.
> As a baseline it would be a context that contains all of schema.org.
> Then add aliases to all the commonly used terms in Solid.  And allow
> extension points.  I think I could fire this up quite quickly.  Would
> anyone else have use for such a thing?
>
>
>>
>>
>> -Sarven
>> https://csarven.ca/#i
>>
>>