[rdfweb-dev] advocating use of rdf:ID / rdf:about attributes onfoaf:Person tags

Jim Ley jim at jibbering.com
Sun Aug 17 03:36:12 UTC 2003

"David Madore" <david.madore at ens.fr>
> (I think the use of rdfs:seeAlso in FOAF should be deprecated
> and maintained for compatibility only.)

FOAF is a vocabulary, foaf files are something that don't meet everyones use
cases, subProperty'ing rdfs:seeAlso is a barrier to scutter developers, and
people understanding foaf, we've seen a lot of people not really
understanding RDF and subProperties etc. So I'm not sure the complication is

My problem with using URI's for people, especially ones you expect to
de-reference is that you need to keep track of URI's and people need to
undertake to keep that URI resolvable, or at least uniquely identifying
themselves for ever, that's not really practical, and it isn't a problem we
have mbox/mbox_sha1sum etc.  Then there's the problem that people will soon
end up with lots of different URI's defining themselves, which complicates
smushing, in that case which is the "official" uri, and should other people

> A Google search returns 745 matches for "FOAF rdf:ID" and only 88 for
> "FOAF rdf:nodeID", so it would seem that people have been following
> the globally unique URI course.

>From my scutter stats, it looks like the majority of people who have URI's
got them from non-authoratative sources - for example somehow I've become
the URI http://xml.mfd-consult.dk/foaf/morten.rdf#jim .  Also, you're
conclusions from the searches don't hold water, since even 850 is not a
significant portion of the foaf universe and in any case you've not limited
the search to rdf filetypes so you're going to get discussions on the
subject aswell (my scutter suggests most people use neither btw.)

I don't want to have a URI that denotes me (I am not a number, and I ain't
going to Portmeiron whatever you do to me) and we certainly don't need one,
I don't feel it helps much either to have one (because if we have one, we'll
have many which doesn't help us any, we'll still have to smush on IFPs like
now, it's just more data for people to get wrong.)

More information about the foaf-dev mailing list