[foaf-protocols] [foaf-dev] revisiting FOAF project goals

Melvin Carvalho melvincarvalho at gmail.com
Wed Jun 24 13:40:04 CEST 2009

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Matthew Rowe<m.rowe at dcs.shef.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hello
> I concur with what Dave has said here, particularly regarding the need
> to explicitly define topics of relationships and associated trust
> values.
> I think that the latter issue (assigning trust values to
> relationships) as this appears to becoming especially important now
> that work within the Semantic Web community is moving towards trust.

This is something I'd also like, to see as trust and reputation
infrastructure (eg for relationships) could be a valuable long term
goal, built of the foundation that FOAF provides.

However, I'm not sure how weight to an edge in RDF, without using a
wrapper around the subject object pair (predicate is assumed) or
reification, though i understand reification is not a popular option.

Perhaps named graphs can help, or maybe storing an extra field in a DB
for the weighting?

> On 24 Jun 2009, at 03:31, Dave Brondsema wrote:
>> I initially became interested in FOAF when I found it as a
>> decentralized
>> way to declare relationships, especially since some social network
>> providers already exported FOAF data.  That was several years ago
>> when I
>> was working on Konfidi, a senior project at school:  http://konfidi.org/
>> I still put some time into working on it and want Konfidi to become
>> truly useful for filtering email and blog spam, and more.  Its
>> progress
>> has been pretty slow though, since it's just one of many side projects
>> for me.
>> For Konfidi, I've ended up deciding that using existing foaf:knows
>> relations is great, but we also have our own Relationship class so we
>> can add topics and trust amounts to the relationship.
>> For practical purposes, I'm mainly interested in the major providers
>> that produce FOAF data, and those that have xfn microformat data.
>> While
>> many of us write our own FOAF files, the public can't be expected to
>> do
>> so, nor even know what FOAF is really.  One part of Konfidi will be a
>> webapp where you can log in with openid and declare some of your
>> relationships.  That would create the RDF for them, but all they'd
>> know
>> is they're using the Konfidi system, nothing about FOAF or RDF.
>> --
>> Dave Brondsema : dave at brondsema.net
>> http://www.brondsema.net : personal
>> http://www.splike.com : programming
>>               <><
>> _______________________________________________
>> foaf-protocols mailing list
>> foaf-protocols at lists.foaf-project.org
>> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols
> Matthew Rowe, MEng
> PhD Student
> OAK Group
> Department of Computer Science
> University of Sheffield
> m.rowe at dcs.shef.ac.uk
> _______________________________________________
> foaf-protocols mailing list
> foaf-protocols at lists.foaf-project.org
> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols

More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list