[rdfweb-dev] Re: <foaf:community>? (Groups are subtle and tricky, keep the format simple!)
danny666 at v...
Sat Dec 21 12:42:30 UTC 2002
>Absolutely, that's why we're here. We're planning some captive
>experiments with local folks to get FOAF networks running and then
>some studies to see what's going on and then some work on inference
>and deduction about social networks... then working out what
>vocabularies are good ways of expressing those things.
Whoah! That sounds really cool.
>This is a fun community to play with because you guys all seem to be
>obsessed with similar stuff and FOAF is a great way to write down
>self-statements in enough detail to start to infer things about
>groups, so yeah, exactly as you say.
>> btw, there's a related list/Drupal board 'group-forming' at :
>This is a follow-up to the Ridiculously Easy Group Forming meme-squall
>that blew over a month or so ago, right? Cool - I'm in.
With people using more and more ways to discuss things (blog comments as
bulletin boards seems to be the latest fad), a consistent way of keeping
track of the forums individuals speak on is probably yet another FOAF use
case. There's a squall of faceted classification discussion going on right
now, and I'm finding it damn near impossible to get the information that is
relevant to what I'm working on because of the volume and cross-forum
distribution of the posts. If I could use a tool to accumulate/aggregate say
'all the posts (anywhere) by Jack Park in relation to facetted
classification', this would help narrow things down.
Perhaps we need a 'Meme of a Friend' vocab too ;-)
More information about the foaf-dev