[foaf-dev] foaf:page for foaf:OnlineAccount
danbri at danbri.org
Thu Dec 17 16:29:05 CET 2009
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Nicholas J Humfrey <njh at aelius.com> wrote:
> I know this has been discussed at length in the past, but is there
> anything wrong with using foaf:page to point to the page for a
> <foaf:OnlineAccount rdf:about="#me-delicious">
> <foaf:page rdf:resource="http://delicious.com/njh" />
> <foaf:accountServiceHomepage rdf:resource="http://delicious.com/" />
Nothing objectively wrong with that use of foaf:page, although the
usage isn't well established. It might be preferable than the wordy
and halfheartedly-introduced foaf:accountProfilePage, which has been
discussed but not spec'd.
The attration to me of using the simplest form, using the page URI as
the OnlineAccount URI, is that it brings us closer to other Web 2-ish
idioms like XFN and the social graph api,
http://code.google.com/apis/socialgraph/ ... and that it takes a layer
of complicating indirection out of our data.
It also looks simpler in RDFa, since we can decorate links, which was
one of the motivations for the pretty-unanimous move from
foaf:holdsAccount to foaf:account:
<p about="/foaf.rdf#danbri">Hello! I'm Dan and I sometimes use <a
I accept that if we want to document the detailed characteristics of
our "account" in the sense of business relationship, we don't want to
mix this up with the page. But I suggest that notion of account is
different anyway; eg. FriendFeed is owned by Facebook now; Flickr by
Yahoo, and so on. This is more a 'username' level of acccount.
Will anything in particular break if we start using the page URIs
direction for OnlineAccount instances?
> Could this become the standard way of doing this? I think it is better
> than making the account page the URI for the foaf:OnlineAccount.
> foaf-dev mailing list
> foaf-dev at lists.foaf-project.org
More information about the foaf-dev