[rdfweb-dev] Re: <foaf:community>? (Groups are subtle and tricky, keep the format simple!)
danny666 at v...
Thu Dec 19 11:26:24 UTC 2002
>I'm definitely not saying ignore community or groups, but I am saying
>that, based on what we've observed, it's good to keep it simple and
>under-specify. I believe if we keep it to simple things that can be
>used in lots of places and then only extend it by using it and
>observing the use (rather than by exercising our creativity on
>thinking up what might work), we'll get more useful results.
Very good point. I think FOAF is probably perfect for getting around the
problems you describe, as RDF makes it reasonably easy to specify properties
(like group membership etc) which may describe stricter/looser connections.
There should be a lot of potential for observing/analysing the emergence of
(social) networks, and suggestions on how things could be made more
researcher-friendly would I'm sure be welcomed.
btw, there's a related list/Drupal board 'group-forming' at :
More information about the foaf-dev