[foaf-dev] Stabilising FOAF terms to use for normative references

Kjetil Kjernsmo kjetilk at opera.com
Thu Apr 12 12:04:27 UTC 2007


Hi all!

[/me taking his work hat on]

The POWDER W3C WG [1] has used several properties and classes of FOAF in 
examples, and during the group's F2F in Boston in January, it was 
resolved that the group prefers to continue to do so.

However, a concern was raised about the stability of FOAF. While FOAF is 
widespread, the community has not clearly expressed a commitment to its 
stability, it is felt. 

Now, danbri blogged about exactly that [2], and the response from the 
POWDER group, and others I believe, is "yes"; we would strongly welcome 
that the community declares a commitment to keep some parts of the 
vocabulary stable, depending on the needs of the FOAF community as well 
as other standardisation efforts. 

We have used stuff like foaf:Organisation and foaf:maker, but the POWDER 
group could come up with a list of things we need, and I'd answer 
danbri's call and volunteer to help with stabilising things.  

Shall we get started?

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/
[2] http://danbri.org/words/2006/09/23/158

Cheers,

Kjetil
-- 
Kjetil Kjernsmo
Semantic Web Specialist
Opera Software ASA


More information about the foaf-dev mailing list