Re: vCard - Old vs. New?

Hi all:
Why don't we organize a "vocabulary management task-force" meeting at 
ESWC in Crete? I think many of you indicated already that they will attend.
I guess we should have at least 3 - 4 hours or an open-end working 
dinner ( I prefer the first).

Here is a doodle poll for it:
http://doodle.com/mhh2tmgiqz5cat3n

Best
Martin

Harry Halpin wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Peter Mika <pmika@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>   
>> And of course, since yesterday, we have to take Google's vcard ontology into
>> account:
>>
>> http://rdf.data-vocabulary.org/rdf.xml
>>     
>
> And the rest of their ontologies into account, but they look like
> straightforward subset of the vCard ontology, and so on with reviewers
> etc, so I'm not concerned. What we really need to do is to move on
> getting certain prefixes for RDFa "reserved" by HTML5, sorting Hixie's
> meta-data proposal. I think, as well a good unified vocabulary hosting
> site/software endorsed by Yahoo!, Google, and W3C ideally.
> Hmmm.....organizationally, what do people think is the next step here?
>
>   
>> Cheers,
>> Peter
>>
>> Harry Halpin wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> On 12 May 2009, at 18:39, Dan Brickley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> If others amongst you will be there, why don't you get together and try
>>>>> to make some progress there? I suggest the Social Web XG as a mechanism
>>>>> for tracking this effort, even if the document surfaces as a SWIG Note,
>>>>> since SWXG meets regularly with minutes, agendas etc while SWIG doesn't
>>>>> have that kind of a mechanism. Enough SWIG folk are engaged in this
>>>>> discussion (now and over the years) that I don't see a problem with
>>>>> doing the update under SWIG.
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>> I'll be at Heraklion for ESWC2009, and also of courese in SWXG. Would
>>> like to merge, will have to re-read both vCard Notes and try to see
>>> what way they can be combined. Off the top of my head,  it appears the
>>> first Note demonstrates the use of RDF containers, while the second
>>> aims for simplicity. We could just aim for simplicity while still
>>> showing how RDF containers can be used to help deal with the complex
>>> cases. The main keys will be to normalise property names and deal with
>>> any actual incompatibilities, which I assume are few.
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Great ... see u there!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers...  Renato Iannella
>>>> NICTA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>     
>
>   

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail: mhepp@computer.org
phone:  +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:    +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:    http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
 	http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:  mfhepp 


Check out the GoodRelations vocabulary for E-Commerce on the Web of Data!
========================================================================

Webcast explaining the Web of Data for E-Commerce:
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.heppnetz.de/projects/goodrelations/webcast/

Tool for registering your business:
----------------------------------
http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/tools/goodrelations-annotator/

Overview article on Semantic Universe:
-------------------------------------
http://www.semanticuniverse.com/articles-semantic-web-based-e-commerce-webmasters-get-ready.html

Project page and resources for developers:
-----------------------------------------
http://purl.org/goodrelations/

Upcoming events:
---------------
Full-day tutorial at ESWC 2009: The Web of Data for E-Commerce in One Day: A Hands-on Introduction to the GoodRelations Ontology, RDFa, and Yahoo! SearchMonkey

http://www.eswc2009.org/program-menu/tutorials/70

Talk at the Semantic Technology Conference 2009: Semantic Web-based E-Commerce: The GoodRelations Ontology

http://www.semantic-conference.com/session/1881/