Re: VCal namespace

Hi Dan,

Here is what I suggest:

-- Correct mentions of the old namespace |http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal# 
in [1]:
---- Two occurrences in Section 4
---- Rewrite Section 7 to reflect that this namespace is deprecated

-- Add a visible note to [2] to reflect the change. On the side, I would 
also suggest to reorganize the page a bit: it has a lot of old material 
(referring to events and chats in 2002!) which have been probably 
surpassed by the state-of-the-art.

Cheers,
Peter


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfcal/
[2] ||http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/|

Dan Connolly wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 19:08 +0100, Peter Mika wrote:
>   
>> Dear All,
>>
>> We just have had a very successful VoCamp [1] behind our back, where we 
>> started to discuss among others the issue of representing popular 
>> microformats in RDF. This is a pressing question because large scale 
>> semantic platforms such as Sindice or Yahoo's SearchMonkey would like to 
>> treat microformats at the RDF level  and at the scale at which some of 
>> our systems work there is no possibility for reasoning. Therefore an 
>> agreement on the mapping is required. It doesn't matter as much what 
>> this agreement is, as long as it is an agreement ;)
>>
>> You can see the outcomes of our current effort at [2]. One of the 
>> problems we spotted was related to VCal. Apparently, there is still 
>> significant confusion as to what the proper namespace for VCal is and 
>> unfortunately the spec at [3] leaves the question in limbo, using either 
>> one or the other namespace at various points.
>>
>> So my question is: could we deprecate
>>
>> |http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal#
>>
>> |in favor of
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/icaltzd#
>>
>>
>> and reflecting this change in the documentation at [3] and at [4]?
>>     
>
> Sounds reasonable. Do you have details in mind? Could you suggest
> patches?
>
> I haven't looked at this stuff for a while; I should review the
> reasons why this wasn't done earlier.
>
> I think the last time I collected my thoughts on all this was:
>
> From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 01:25:37 -0500
> reconsidering timezones in light of hCalendar and CALSIFY
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-calendar/2006Apr/0002.html
>
> I wonder what, if anything, Masahide Kanzaki is currently supporting
> in this area. I recall earlier discussion with him about
> this namespace...
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-calendar/2004Oct/0004.html
>
> Antoni Mylka wrote up some problems, though I haven't reviewed
> them closely.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-calendar/2007May/0005.html
>
>
>
>   
>> Thanks,
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> [1] http://vocamp.org [2] http://semanticweb.org/wiki/Microformats_in_RDF
>>
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfcal/
>>
>> [4] http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/
>>

Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2008 11:14:51 UTC