[foaf-dev] Time to make the foaf classes relate to Dublin Core
danbri at danbri.org
Wed Jan 23 00:13:06 GMT 2008
On 16 Jan 2008, at 09:07, Mikael Nilsson wrote:
> Just this Monday, DCMI released  an updated set of term definitions
>  with new RDF schemas . Among the terms are a number of classes
> that are now used as domains / ranges of DCMI properties .
> This would be a good time to formally declare the relationships
> the foaf classes and the DCMI classes. Off the top of my head, I can
> relationships between:
> FOAF DC
> foaf:Agent dcterms:Agent: A resource that acts or has the power to
> foaf:Image dcmitype:Image: A visual representation other than text.
> dcterms:Agent is now the range of dcterms:contributor and
> so it would make an important connection between the two specs.
> Actually, I would not think an owl:sameAs relations between the two
> pairs above would be wrong, but even a subClass would be useful.
Thanks for raising this. I agree that the two classes have the same
members. Had a chat with Tom Baker earlier too, and we couldn't think
of any example "agents" that these two definitions would disagree
about. The owl:sameAs relation, however, would be too strong, since
the classes are different beasts. They have different history,
provenance and other facts about them. But reciprocal subclass claims,
or other OWL statements to same effect, would be fine. I've talked a
few times with Tom about signing of RDF statement for this sort of
thing, but for now I'll just add this to the next rev of the FOAF
spec, unless anyone can come up with a counter-example.
>  http://dublincore.org/news/2008/#dcmi-news-20080114-01
>  http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/
>  http://dublincore.org/schemas/rdfs/
>  http://dublincore.org/documents/domain-range/
> <mikael at nilsson.name>
> Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
> foaf-dev mailing list
> foaf-dev at lists.foaf-project.org
More information about the foaf-dev