Re: ROR - Resources of a Resource

On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 21:44, Dom Vonarburg wrote:

> >(2) If so, will it map to existing properties in vocabularies like
> FOAF and vCard and of course the almighty dublin core?
> As much as possible, yes. FOAF, vCard and of course Dublin Core are
> definite candidates.
> >(3) Not to rain on your parade either, but most of this is possible
> in existing, well understood vocabularies...
> Which vocabularies are you refering to?

* <general>: RDF itself (ror:type, for instance) [0], Dublin Core [1]
* Contact:  vCard [2] / FOAF [3]
* Legal:  P3P [4]
* Message:  EMIR [5] / DOAML [6]
* Review:  Rev [7], RVW [8]
* WebService/HttpService:  OWL-S [9]

There are a good set of terms you cover which _aren't_ covered by
existing ontologies, but both that fact and your approach beg the
question: why one shallow+broad ontology rather than a lot of
appropriately-modeled ontologies which can be composed?

I see a serious advantage in that it's a comprehendable one-stop-shop
for describing resources.  But as its time is divided describing so many
things, and none of them well, it may end up not being well-suited for
most purposes.

>From the other side, some of the sub-vocabs in ROR are awesome; it would
be really nice to have a vocab specifically for describing images, for



-- - `a=jsled;; echo ${a}@${b}`

Received on Tuesday, 14 December 2004 14:01:33 UTC