Re: vcard:AddressBook

Ah ok, yes, that makes total sense.
In that case even a handwritten collection of addresses in a paper address
book would be a vCard:AddressBook, and so would a file in vCard format.

On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 19:47, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> po 31. 3. 2025 v 19:38 odesílatel Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> napsal:
>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 18:29 Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> Not my type; not my plans! But we should know how to answer questions
>> about which entities fall within it’s definition, and we cannot assume
>> questions all come from folk with RDF expertise
>>
>
> +1 noting there's different degrees of RDF expertise.  You could study it
> for 10 years, and not know everything.  But some basics should be known,
> what is a URI, what is an HTTP Document, what is a Class, what is a
> Property -- that's a few minutes of learning, or a single prompt, these
> days.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>