[rdfweb-dev] Re: FOAF Schema Validation
GK at ninebynine.org
Wed Feb 5 15:58:46 UTC 2003
At 08:09 AM 2/5/03 +0000, Julian Bond wrote:
>Not so long ago, I asked a question about FOAF coding style and was told
>that the FOAF spec follows implementation, not the other way round. I
>clearly misunderstood something then. I really thought that FOAF was an
>attempt to create a standard. If that had been the case, then clearly
>Implementation <-> Spec is a circular process. Put up samples, agree a
>spec, bring the samples in line, try something new, adjust the spec, bring
>the implementations in line with the new spec, etc etc, continue until bored.
>So what is the community's goal here? And I choose the word "community"
>deliberately because FOAF is now bigger than the people who started it.
Speaking personally... my goal (or wish) is that FOAF provides a vocabulary
that I can pick up (and sometimes extend) for describing miscellaneous
things about people and friends in my toyings with RDF. As such, I have no
need for a restricted form of syntax (though I do appreciate why some folks
might like that). For me, one of the benefits of using RDF is that the
syntax is one less thing I have to worry about when doing designs --
RDF/XML and Notation3 fulfill all my needs there (and cwm maps between them
This being feedback from just one member of the "community".
<GK at NineByNine.org>
More information about the foaf-dev