Re: vcard:AddressBook

po 31. 3. 2025 v 19:22 odesílatel Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> napsal:

> The vast majority of rdf classes are for describing “non rdf” stuff from
> everyday world. People, places, etc. Some are document-like eg Dublin Core
> typical usecase.
>
> The reason this is slippery to think about is that RDF’s role in
> describing these things is often kind of transparent - part of the
> application infrastructure. Except sometimes we do talk about file formats
> for rdf and other kinds of thing. The Linked Data idea tried to set
> expectations that URIs for instances of all types of thing can be
> dereferenced to some kind of RDF, even if the type has nothing itself to do
> with RDF….
>

Wont a vcard AddressBook just be a set of vcard : contacts?  Much like
Tracker is to -> Task.  Or is something else planned for it.


>
> Dan
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 17:37 Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
> wrote:
>
>> That’s a good question. Are there other examples where RDF classes are
>> used to describe non-RDF documents?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 17:41, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Is a vcard file in ietf format a vcard:Addressbook in this sense?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 16:34 Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unless someone objects I will contact W3C staff to make the edit in
>>>> https://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Michiel
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 10:41, Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The reaction on the Calsify mailing list (from my respected personal
>>>>> friend Hans-Joerg Happel) sounded positive:
>>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/calsify/17sFwUiDu-zp77vbiQBJRjR-_L8/
>>>>> There was also a thumbs-up from Pete Rivett on Tim Berners-Lee point
>>>>> here:
>>>>> https://github.com/solid/contacts/issues/8#issuecomment-2719050285
>>>>>
>>>>> That makes me think that adding the terms from
>>>>> https://github.com/solid/contacts/pull/12/files?short_path=d90e4ed#diff-d90e4edb2d214338309e8948af2f00da8dac0954ae325f903ad5b85d9ae6e9e5
>>>>> into https://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns could be a reasonable path
>>>>> forward? What would be the next step to explore that?
>>>>>
>>>>> And in general, can we (as a DX improvement) create links from
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns to https://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf/
>>>>> and the other documents that describe it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>> Michiel de Jong
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 16:19, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2025-03-20 15:52, Michiel de Jong wrote:
>>>>>> > Thanks! I asked them how they would feel about vCard-related RDF
>>>>>> terms
>>>>>> > existing only at W3C:
>>>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/calsify/
>>>>>> > TtTXanhR-iK39MUIiaQv41lnS7U/ <
>>>>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/
>>>>>> > calsify/TtTXanhR-iK39MUIiaQv41lnS7U/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to increase the chances of getting new terms into vCard,
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> suggest dialing back on Solid. Sharing implementation experience is
>>>>>> very
>>>>>> useful, but be prepared to generalise it - without making it seem
>>>>>> Solid-specific - so that it has broader applicability and a higher
>>>>>> chance of gaining wider support. Anything Solid-centric for vCard use
>>>>>> will most likely need to remain within the Solid ecosystem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Sarven
>>>>>> https://csarven.ca/#i
>>>>>>
>>>>>>