[foaf-dev] are these files valid FOAF?

Christian Ledermann christian.ledermann at gmail.com
Mon Apr 23 05:15:56 EDT 2012


On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Christian Ledermann
<christian.ledermann at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your replies, I appreciate it very much.
>
> I know that foaf was mainly designed to express the social graph
> between persons, so my use case is not really covered by this
> specification. OTOH, professional information like this can be
> integrated into a social graph so it is not so unrelated as it may
> look at first glance.
>
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Michael Haschke
> <haschek at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> ... to make it more sensible, you'd need to  say "ok, what is the
>>> *relationship* between that organization and that person?
>>> I'm not sure what would be best here, formally foaf:knows is really
>>> between people, not an org and and a person - see
>>> http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_knows
>>
>> Maybe (and I just can guess) foaf:member is meant here. I wished we
>> would have an inverse property of foaf:member, would things make
>> easier to say that a person is part of a group.
>
> I agree, there is:
> http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_membershipClass
>
> which is rather abstract and not very end user friendly
>
> a construct like
>
> <rdf:RDF>
>    <foaf:Person rdf:ID="fi22a47b04eece6d5f2e26d58fd1a6930b">
>       <foaf:memberOf>
>           <foaf:Organization
> rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/.../foaf.rdf"/>
>       <foaf:memberOf>
>       <foaf:memberOf>
>           <foaf:Project rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/.../foaf.rdf"/>
>       <foaf:memberOf>
>   </foaf:Person>
> </rdf:RDF>


oops this should be:
<rdf:RDF ... xmlns:org="http://www.w3.org/ns/org#" ...>

        <org:memberOf>
            <foaf:Organization
rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/.../@@foaf.rdf"/>
        </org:memberOf>
     ...

and

            <org:memberOf>
                <foaf:Project rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/.../@@rdf"/>
            </org:memberOf>
        ...


> would be more humanly readable without giving up machine readability
>
>
>> Right now I sometimes
>> use foaf:currentProject but this does not feel right.
>
> yes this does not feel right to me either, especially with the relation
> person -> org
>
>> Any other
>> suggestions?
>
>
> from the documentation:
>
> ===============
> Property: foaf:member
>
> member - Indicates a member of a Group
> Status: stable
> Domain: having this property implies being a Group
> Range:   every value of this property is a Agent
> The member property relates a Group to a Agent that is a member of that group.
>
> See Group for details and examples.
> ===================
>
>
> as organization  seems to be a special case of a group:
>
> ===============
> Class: foaf:Organization
>
> Organization - An organization.
> Status: stable
> Subclass Of     Agent
> Disjoint With:  Person Document
> The Organization class represents a kind of Agent corresponding to
> social instititutions such as companies, societies etc.
>
> This is a more 'solid' class than Group, which allows for more ad-hoc
> collections of individuals. These terms, like the corresponding
> natural language concepts, have some overlap, but different emphasis.
> =================
>
>
> I think this would be more according to the specification:
>
>
> <rdf:RDF>
>   <foaf:Organization rdf:ID="fee5905f">
>      <foaf:name>United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)</foaf:name>
>   ...
>
>     <foaf:member>
>         <foaf:Person rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/.../@@foaf.rdf"/>
>     </foaf:member>
>     <foaf:member>
>           <foaf:Person rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/.../@@foaf.rdf"/>
>      </foaf:member>

ooops again:

         <foaf:member>
                <foaf:Person rdf:about="http://localhost:8080/.../@@foaf.rdf"/>
            </foaf:member>




> ...
>  </foaf:Organization>
> </rdf:RDF>
>
>
>
>> Christian's foaf file contains projects. Foaf voc itself lacks a
>> property to relate a group with a project, any ideas here?
>>
>
> I'll have a closer look at:
>
> http://www.epimorphics.com/public/vocabulary/org.html
>
> and report back
>

It seems that for backlinks from persons to organizations the
org:memberOf is a good match

any thoughts about:

persons -> projects
and org -> projects?


>
>> regards,
>> Haschek
>> --
>> http://michael.haschke.biz/
>> _______________________________________________
>> foaf-dev mailing list
>> foaf-dev at lists.foaf-project.org
>> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Christian Ledermann
>
> Nairobi - Kenya
> Mobile : +254 702978914
>
> <*)))>{
>
> If you save the living environment, the biodiversity that we have left,
> you will also automatically save the physical environment, too. But If
> you only save the physical environment, you will ultimately lose both.
>
> 1) Don’t drive species to extinction
>
> 2) Don’t destroy a habitat that species rely on.
>
> 3) Don’t change the climate in ways that will result in the above.
>
> }<(((*>



-- 
Best Regards,

Christian Ledermann

Nairobi - Kenya
Mobile : +254 702978914

<*)))>{

If you save the living environment, the biodiversity that we have left,
you will also automatically save the physical environment, too. But If
you only save the physical environment, you will ultimately lose both.

1) Don’t drive species to extinction

2) Don’t destroy a habitat that species rely on.

3) Don’t change the climate in ways that will result in the above.

}<(((*>


More information about the foaf-dev mailing list