[foaf-dev] Proposal: deprecate pastProject and currentProject

Dan Brickley danbri at danbri.org
Sun Dec 13 22:12:55 CET 2009


On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Richard Cyganiak <richard at cyganiak.de> wrote:
>
> On 13 Dec 2009, at 09:57, Dan Brickley wrote:
>>
>> Since FOAF is presented as a "dictionary of terms", and since it
>> tracks vocabulary usage in a global Web, the idea of 'deprecate' is a
>> bit strong. So we are instead suggesting to use a marker of "archaic"
>> in the spec.
>
> I think this gets a cautious +1 from me, assuming that some new prop for
> relating foaf:Persons to foaf:Projects is added.

There's a risk with this stuff of building parallel sets of
properties; those that link to pages and those that link to the
primary topics of those pages. RDFa biases us towards the former,
modelling clarity towards the latters. Reminds me of the XFN mapping
discussion too.

workplaceHomepage, schoolHomepage are in former category; pastProject,
currentProject too on my preferred reading; but I don't have a strong
view.

> The phrase “archaic use of RDF” will definitely henceforth be part of my
> dictionary.

:)

> How would you mark terms as archaic?

Simplest is probably to try to get write access to
http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/ns# again, under informal
some SWIG banner most likely. FOAF already uses that ns for flagging
status of terms. I'm amused that *that* vocab is itself marked
unstable, but I guess we can work on that too!

cheers,

Dan


More information about the foaf-dev mailing list