- From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:21:26 -0500
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, www-tag@w3.org, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGR+nnFT57_xbZPqmh5Mi7++EC=PY_EvviXUnusj2gBCSszQLg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: > On 11/21/2012 12:17 AM, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote: > > Jonathan, > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>wrote: > >> Cool! Thanks to all of you (Stephane, David, Sandro) for all this >> material. The approach was covered pretty poorly in my issue-57 >> writeup, will amend. >> >> The idea has come up with some favorable reception in a couple of TAG >> discussions, so it's useful to have both the pro and con. >> > > For the records, could you indicate where the materials above were > recorded and discussed by the TAG members? I'm curious to see what progress > was made on the 'parallel properties' in relation to the other email I sent > about mandating a particular type of URI deployment without an official > httpRange-14 resolution. > > Steph. > > >> >> Still not sure exactly what the Facebook connection is, but that >> doesn't matter too much I guess. >> >> > I'm coming into the side of this conversation -- I'm not following the TAG > directly -- I've just had conversations about this with Jeni, Tim, and > Stéphane recently. (Sorry for disappearing yesterday, Stéphane.) The > reference for "parallel properties" that I know of is my original blog post > and ISWC lightning talk slide: > > http://decentralyze.com/2010/11/10/simplified-rdf/ > > I'd approach it slightly differently now, but the basic idea is there. > It came out of trying to handle Facebook's objection to RDF, which was that > it was too hard for Web developers / Web authors to manage the distinctions > between strings, datatyped values, URLs for web content, and IRIs denoting > arbitrary resources. In the design of the Open Graph Protocol they > avoided making such distinction. I thought about that, and realized it > could still be seen as carrying the same information, if one just considers > those distinctions embedded into the predicate. > Note that OGP isn't the only example (although it's the most widely deployed currently), schema.org follows the same approach, e.g. using http://schema.org/Person for a page about a person. cc'ing danbri. Steph. > > -- Sandro > > > > Best >> Jonathan >> > > > > -- > Steph. > > > -- Steph.
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2012 13:21:54 UTC