[rdfweb-dev] Re: IRC channel
libby.miller at b...
Wed Mar 28 19:10:49 UTC 2001
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Aaron Swartz wrote:
> It's nitpick boy to the rescue! ;-)
> 1) Classes should be capitalized, as should the WordNet terms that they
> reference. Currently you have a bunch of bad links/definitions. (affects
> person and document)
> 2) lastName seems to have slipped out of the schema... Oh wait, I see it's
> up at the top as surname. Hmm. There should probably be an equivalence
> between givenname and firstname. Actually maybe not since first name is a
> presentational issue...
this is a legacy/what exists problem. I'd be inclined to go with one or
the other. (checks Dan's mail) Dan's on it.
--left for now
> 3) What's up with the links to the WD RDFS namespace? Shouldn't these be
> updated to the real namespace?
> http://webns.net/rdfs/ -> http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
eh? don't understand
> 4) assurance? Isn't this in the wot namespace? I guess not...
not according to http://rdfweb.org/~pldab/rdfweb/webwho.xrdf, which was
what I was working from.
> 5) Isn't img rdfs:subClassOf depiction?
dunno. oh, ok, maybe, if there were various paintings of people, or
drawings... I was thinking of img differently, as any image on the web
(like html img). Img as a property denotomg the type of thing at the
sharp end (something displayable) and depiction as more general? It's
maybe debateable that we need both of these. My inclination is to keep
it simple as possible.
--left for now
> 6) I don't remember what Dan decided about the knows/knowsWell, etc.
> controversy, but there should be subclasses in here somewhere.
--removed: friend, knowsWell, worksWith, livesWith, sigOther, wife,
for later discussion
> 7) Shouldn't sister be sibling and wife be spouse? Well, definitely sister
> -- I mean, what about men with only brothers?
I was summarizing what people had already used when I first wrote this
schema. You're right of course.
> 8) Why isn't your table of contents in the same order as the schema? And
> even better would be if it was in html (with links to the properties)
> instead of in a comment.
> 9) Notably absent is:
> :contribProject a rdf:Property
> rdfs:domain wn:person; rdfs:range wn:Project .
Dan's also got pubkeyAddress (maybe wot?), made (for rss channels). I've
got calendar. What about address book properties like work/home phone,
home address, work address, fax....
we need to discuss these.
left out for now (though spound good to me)
> Either way, thanks a lot for putting this schema together. The foaf ns was
> becoming a bit of a hodgepodge.
and it still is!
Is a strategy to prune it as much as we can and then add namespaces in a
modular fashion as Dan suggested with knows but more
generally? (e.g. addressBook?)
More information about the foaf-dev