Re: vcard:AddressBook

Yes, I added it to the Solid CG agenda for Wednesday:
https://hackmd.io/NR7hHvEbQcKDBHEJUh4hXg#Moving-AddressBook-from-vcard-to-foaf

Also cc'ing vocab-services now to this thread, which I said I would do but
hadn't actually.


Cheers,
Michiel de Jong
Solid CG co-chair

On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 05:15, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> po 10. 3. 2025 v 15:13 odesílatel Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
> napsal:
>
>> Thank you Dan, let's see if we can make that happen!
>>
>> Let's discuss this further in https://github.com/solid/contacts/issues/8
>>
>
> Nice work!
>
> vcard / contacts is probably a special case because of the big network
> effect that it has.
>
> But I think in general we should move a bit more quickly with vocabs, in
> order to help, app developers
>
> Let's try and work with vcard vocab, and the change control that has built
> up around that.  But give it a time limit after which we can say we are
> blocked.
>
> RDF lends itself quite well to contingency planning if the primary
> approach doesnt work.
>
> So, let's try and see if we can add AddressBook to vcard, say, in the next
> 2 weeks?
>
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michiel
>>
>> On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 16:08, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 14:31 Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I believe the point of that vcard-rdf note was to reflect into RDF the
>>> existing vCard design rather than to improve upon it, ie making up new
>>> stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>> Looking at
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6350.html
>>>
>>> ….the string “addressbook” only seems used once, for an example website
>>> url path.
>>>
>>> How much of vcard-rdf are you actually using? If there are non-gigantic
>>> patches to FOAF that would address this usecase and the community generally
>>> thought useful we could look into that.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>