[foaf-dev] FOAF spec revised - addition of foaf:focus, some rough edges tidied, and new rough edges added

Bob Ferris zazi at elbklang.net
Mon Aug 9 11:09:49 CEST 2010

Hi Dan,

congrats to the new release. Here some more proposals from VoCamp 
2010[1], which seem to be very interesting:

<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/topic_interest">
        <owl:propertyChainAxiom rdf:parseType="Collection">
                <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://xmlns.notu.be/wi/topic"/>

<owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/follows">
       <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"/>
        <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://xmlns.notu.be/wi/" />

Furthermore, I think foaf:interest is a bit misleading, because it has 
the range of foaf:Document. I know there is also foaf:topic_interest 
with an open range (or at least owl:Thing). However, I would prefer 
foaf:interest here and introduce a new sub property of foaf:page for the 
first use case (see also [2]).



[2] http://chatlogs.planetrdf.com/foaf/2010-08-08.html

Am 09.08.2010 01:33, schrieb Dan Brickley:
> Hi folks,
> I've just committed a revision to the FOAF spec. It's dated 9th August
> and minor tweaks are (as usual) quite likely for the next ~24 hours.
> The main addition is the foaf:focus property, which relates some SKOS
> concepts to the things they stand for.
> A bundle of other fixes and updates are in there too; I've summarised
> these in the spec as follows,
> "Changes in version 0.98
> This revision introduces the new foaf:focus term, fixes a few
> long-standing editorial bugs, and makes some largely predictable
> changes to the 'status' of various terms. Some older text has been
> archived to the Wiki. New overview text has been added, which attempts
> to present more clearly the general approach, design and philosophy of
> the project. The 'at a glance' has been simplified, and now shows
> 'core' and 'social Web' groupings from FOAF's most widely used terms.
> Consumers of the machine-readable version should note that some
> disjointness and rdfs:domain claims have been relaxed, as detailed
> below; also that the values of the foaf:logo property are now
> considered uniquely identifying. "
> ... with more details at the end of the spec as follows (
> http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#sec-changes )
> "Changes in version 0.98
>      * "The FOAF RDF namespace" clarified as "The FOAF RDF namespace URI".
>      * clarified that RDF/XML now available by conneg and direct link,
> but not embedded; and that inline RDFa is partial.
>      * swapped order of a couple of paragraphs from SOTD section;
> technical detail comes later now.
>      * added sepia (#5E2612) to style.css, for use as 'archaic'
> background color on old terms.
>      * added foaf:focus "The foaf:focus property relates a
> conceptualisation of something to the thing itself." We stay quiet for
> now on whether it is functional, inverse functional, ...
>      * added mention of SKOS Concept to index.rdf and to the 'external
> vocabs' section of the HTML spec.
>      * added brief description of owl:sameAs to the 'external vocabs' section.
>      * created basic http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/Conneg and linked
> from mention in spec of Content negotiation.
>      * Added explanatory text alongside 'domain' and 'range', inspired
> by, and borrowing from, the Bio vocabulary.
>      * removed link to Jim Ley's old SVG image annotation demo, as it
> isn't maintained.
>      * moved large section on FOAF and RDF into the Wiki as FOAFandRDF.
>      * fixed a mistaken reference to isPrimarySubjectOf (where
> '...topic' was intended).
>      * topic_interest: removed placeholder health warning and added a
> simple definition
>      * index.rdf: From unstable to testing: Project (we should review
> DOAP usage and data too), OnlineAccount (should we specify URI as
> profile page?), based_near (time to review AR/POI use cases?), title
> (vs. honorific prefix?), skypeID, lastName, openid, account,
> accountServiceHomepage, accountName (would simple 'name' work?),
>      * index.rdf: From unstable to archaic: dna_checksum (joke isn't
> funny any more...)
>      * index.rdf: From testing to archaic: surname (tidying clutter
> from the early days)
>      * index.rdf: From testing to stable:
> primaryTopic/isPrimaryTopicOf, knows (since these are widely used and
> definitions haven't changed or been contested)
>      * index.rdf: confirmed that Image is a subClassOf Document
>      * index.rdf: removed some false disjointness claims: people can be
> documents (tatoos); agents can be documents (eg. java software agents)
>      * index.rdf: our local label for owl:Thing is now "Thing" not "a
> Thing" (largely a spec generation detail)
>      * index.rdf: broadened foaf:topic_interest and foaf:interest to
> have domain of Agent rather than Person, allowing for collective
> (group, project, organization) interests.
>      * index.rdf: foaf:logo is an Inverse Functional Property now"
> If there are any screaming showstoppers or major controversy, rolling
> back the "front page" version is also always possible, but hasn't ever
> yet been needed.
> As I look over the original text with reasonably fresh eyes (the stuff
> at the top, not the per-term docs), it is a quite painfully jumbled
> mix. To get things manageable, I have started moving chunks of
> explanatory blurb into the Wiki. However I've also added some new
> wording at the top, a still rough attempt to characterise what the
> project is about in a way that might help future readers not be
> suprised when things like 'foaf:focus" are added. I also reorganized
> the topical 'at a glance' overview of terms; currently it is down to
> just two sections - 'core foaf' and 'social Web', where the latter is
> essentially terminology that can describe people from the past, and
> the latter is terminology that in some sense mentions modern
> Internet/Web technology. This turns out to cover most of what we have,
> apart from some largely archaic pieces and a few utility terms. The
> older jokey and demo pieces (myersBriggs, geekcode) have also been
> further downplayed; they are still in there, but not mentioned from
> the introductory / overview sections.
> The main doc validates as XHTML+RDFa, the index.rdf version as RDF/XML...
> cheers,
> Dan

More information about the foaf-dev mailing list