- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 22:50:15 -0500
- To: www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
See the discussion on SWIG http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2005/02/09/2005-02-09.html#1107960722.011240 which points to http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical-ifp.n3 and http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2005/02/09/2005-02-09.html#1107960585.916652 which points to http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/tzd/ifps I have basically added those IFPs and FPs which seemed to make sense and which allow one to uniquely nail (indirectly name) every bnode in a calendar graph. This is for making patches from changes files, as in http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Diff Currently, delta.py will take extra metadata files with --meta=ifps.n3 but it would be much nicer to have them in the ontology: I'd like them to represent community understanding. The remaining issues are just the lack of UIDs on calendars themselves and on alarms. Both these have X- identifiers in various clients, but that doesn't help if they are not generally supported. The calendar ID issue is easy: there is normally one per file, and it can be passed as a parameter at conversion time. A possibility with alarms is to regard them as structured datatypes, so basically concatenating their parameters (offset time, noise, etc) as strings gives a sort of name. Tim BL
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2005 03:50:20 UTC