[rdfweb-dev] foaf:publications

Peter Mika pmika at cs.vu.nl
Thu Feb 23 13:49:51 UTC 2006


:)

Human-readable is kind of wishy-washy isn't it? I can read my BibTeX file
and mostly edit it by hand and I would rather be classified human :)

Cheers,
Peter


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Reto Bachmann-Gmür [mailto:knobot at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 2:43 PM
> To: Peter Mika
> Cc: rdfweb-dev at vapours.rdfweb.org
> Subject: Re: [rdfweb-dev] foaf:publications
> 
> Peter Mika schrieb:
> >> sound like a argument for dropping RDF in favor of CSV ;-)
> >>
> >
> > CSV is at least easy to write :)
> >
> indeed, the first line that's you, all other lines persons you know
> (FOAF 3.0)
> >
> >
> >> I'm not proposing to mandate content-negotiation, but URI-schemas like
> >> HTTP are very spread for naming foaf:Document and for this you may use
> >> content negotiation. Not only semweb oriented server like knobot, even
> >> apache supports it. You still may indicate the content-type of your
> list
> >> of publications, but this should not be constrained by the
> >> foaf:published property. If you prefer not use content negotiation and
> >> feel no need for "Cool URIs" you can have the following triples in your
> >> foaf-file:
> >> [ a foaf:Person;
> >>   foaf:published [ = <http://example.org/pubs.xhtml>; eg:mediaType
> >> "application/xhtml+xml"],
> >>                            [ = <http://example.org/pubs.bibtex>;
> >> eg:mediaType "text/x-bibtex"]
> >> ].
> >>
> >
> > The property is called foaf:publications :)
> >
> thanks.
> > Again, my feeling is that people (who have problems understanding the
> > current two-liner of a definition) will certainly not go into the
> trouble of
> > specifying content-types the way you suggest and/or configuring servers.
> >
> In my proposal the two-liner gets shorter, as the "human-readable" part
> is removed. (The lines added would be more an rdfs:comment that part of
> the skos:definition ;-)
> > The implicit argument of trying to keep foaf simple (intentionally
> > underspecified) is something I have sympathy with. What I'm trying to
> argue
> > is that it would be important to support the possibility of pointing to
> > individual publications (which can be used for disambiguation) as well
> as
> > collections of publications (which can be used for presentation purposes
> or
> > to acquire information about individual publications after further
> > processing). So I would suggest minimally to refer to the foaf:made
> property
> > in the definition of foaf:publications as a way to point to individual
> > publications or even introduce a separate foaf:published property.
> agreed
> > For
> > pointing to BibTeX files I guess my approach will be to create a
> subproperty
> > of foaf:publications.
> >
> you can do this - not sure if BibTeX is to be considered as a "human
> readable form", though.
> 
> :bibTextPulications
>   rdfs:subProprtyOf foaf:publications;
>   rdfs:range
>         [
>             rdfs:subClassOf
>             [
>                 a owl:Restriction;
>                 owl:onProperty eg:mimeType;
>                 owl:hasValue "application/x-bibtext"
>             ]
>         ].
> 
> reto




More information about the foaf-dev mailing list