Re: VCal namespace

Dan Connolly pisze:
> 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
> 

Since my post in May 2007, the Nepomuk Calendar Ontology has been posted 
on a server where it is available at its proper namespace. Some 
decisions we made come from the Nepomuk background. I'm not saying that 
it should be used as it is, but the problems I listed at [1] might be 
worth a look.

[1]
http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/2007/04/02/ncal/#sec-drawbacks

Antoni Mylka
antoni.mylka@gmail.com

Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2008 11:59:49 UTC