Re: vcard:AddressBook

Hm, vocab-services@w3.org bounced. Does
https://www.w3.org/2016/08/namespaces/ need to be updated?

Cheers,
Michiel

On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 10:56, Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org> wrote:

> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>