[foaf-dev] Re: updated FOAF spec
axel.polleres at deri.org
Tue Jun 12 22:35:01 BST 2007
Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> Thanks again for providing a date-spaced version of FOAF and for
> maturing many of the classes and properties to stable status. The ERT WG
> has looked at this latest draft (FOAF 0.9, 24 May 2007) and we have a
> few questions and request for clarifications:
> #1. Stability of essential FOAF properties
> - The following FOAF properties are currently not marked as stable but
> we regard them as crucial to identify resources such as foaf:Agent:
> * foaf:mbox_sha1sum - I thought this was recommended over foaf:mbox in
> one of the earlier FOAF specs.
> * foaf:name and all its derivatives (foaf:firstName, foaf:givenname,
> foaf:surname, foaf:family_name).
> - What is the plan for stabilizing foaf:name and foaf_mbox_sha1sum? We
> use these (especially foaf:name) to identify agents such as foaf:Person.
> #2. Definition and stability of foaf:homepage
> - Currently foaf:homepage is marked as stable which is very helpful.
> However, the range of this property is foaf:Document which in turn is
> marked testing putting the stability in a kind of limbo. What is the
> correct usage of this property to point to a home page of a person or
> organization? We currently use foaf:homepage as follows in EARL 1.0:
> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="example.org"/>
> - Also, foaf:homepage is defined as "A 'homepage' in this sense is a
> public Web document". What is *public*? Can it be a password protected
> resource or only available on an intranet?
> #3. Relationship to Wordnet and other vocabularies
> - Several classes such as foaf:Agent or foaf:Person are subclasses of
> Wordnet (or other vocabulary) terms. What is the stability of these
> vocabularies and what impact on FOAF would changes in these external
> vocabularies have?
> - Note that there are no namespace documents associated with the
> Wordnet terms. For example <http://xmlns.com/wordnet/1.6/Person>
> generates a 404 message.
I think you point out a relevant issue here which is a general one.
What you critizise here is at the moment "only" covered in some best
*Working Draft*, 14 March 2006
anybody hints about whether this will make it any further in the
recommendation process and what is their timline? Seems to be stalled
since over a yeat, but admittedly I didn't follow the best practices
> Note: the link to the previous version on the top of the page doesn't
> work, it points back to the same version instead of the version of 14
> January 2007:
> - <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/20070114.html>
Dr. Axel Polleres
email: axel at polleres.net url: http://www.polleres.net/
More information about the foaf-dev