headers
Dan Brickley | 13 Jun 2012 14:34

[foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc

(It's a google doc rather than Wiki page for now, to avoid getting
distracted by sysadmin; if you'd like access please request...)

Libby and I just met to sketch out a plan towards FOAF 1.0, looking at
feedback from the recent thread here, and integration possibilities
with PoCo, Schema.org and other work.

Current notes are at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18sktpEWqREts-IjtrWU6eFXiR_VR3GVX9HPdlazOC0o/edit

Feedback welcomed here or anywhere...

cheers,

Dan & Libby
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dominique Guardiola | 13 Jun 2012 15:02
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


Le 13 juin 2012 à 14:34, Dan Brickley a écrit :

> (It's a google doc rather than Wiki page for now, to avoid getting
> distracted by sysadmin; if you'd like access please request...)
> 
> Libby and I just met to sketch out a plan towards FOAF 1.0, looking at
> feedback from the recent thread here, and integration possibilities
> with PoCo, Schema.org and other work.
> 
> Current notes are at
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18sktpEWqREts-IjtrWU6eFXiR_VR3GVX9HPdlazOC0o/edit

I had no feedback at all about this foaf:Contact idea
in a word : a Class that could act as a superclass for any "mean of contact" RDF class, supposing the need I
exposed (linking metadata to a phone number or an email address without using blank nodes) is shared by others.

can you just tell me if :
- you don't see this need right now
- the name "Contact" is not suited (I'm not a native english speaker)
- you don't understand a word of what I'm posting on the list

thanks ;)

--
Dominique Guardiola, QUINODE
• http://www.quinode.fr/
• Tel : 04.27.86.84.37
• Mob : 06.15.13.22.27
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dan Brickley | 13 Jun 2012 15:44

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


On 13 Jun 2012, at 15:02, Dominique Guardiola <dguardiola <at> quinode.fr> wrote:

> 
> Le 13 juin 2012 à 14:34, Dan Brickley a écrit :
> 
>> (It's a google doc rather than Wiki page for now, to avoid getting
>> distracted by sysadmin; if you'd like access please request...)
>> 
>> Libby and I just met to sketch out a plan towards FOAF 1.0, looking at
>> feedback from the recent thread here, and integration possibilities
>> with PoCo, Schema.org and other work.
>> 
>> Current notes are at
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18sktpEWqREts-IjtrWU6eFXiR_VR3GVX9HPdlazOC0o/edit
> 
> 
> 
> I had no feedback at all about this foaf:Contact idea
> in a word : a Class that could act as a superclass for any "mean of contact" RDF class, supposing the need I
exposed (linking metadata to a phone number or an email address without using blank nodes) is shared by others.
> 
> can you just tell me if :
> - you don't see this need right now
> - the name "Contact" is not suited (I'm not a native english speaker)
> - you don't understand a word of what I'm posting on the list

It makes perfect sense and has been proposed in various guises over the years. There is something similar in
schema.org/ContactPoint ...
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dominique Guardiola | 13 Jun 2012 18:34
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


Le 13 juin 2012 à 15:44, Dan Brickley a écrit :

>>> Current notes are at
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18sktpEWqREts-IjtrWU6eFXiR_VR3GVX9HPdlazOC0o/edit
>> 
>> I had no feedback at all about this foaf:Contact idea
>> in a word : a Class that could act as a superclass for any "mean of contact" RDF class, supposing the need I
exposed (linking metadata to a phone number or an email address without using blank nodes) is shared by others.
> 

> It makes perfect sense and has been proposed in various guises over the years. There is something similar
in schema.org/ContactPoint ...

yes, I looked at schema's ContactPoint before, but it represents rather an Agent than a pure single
"Contact information" thing. 
We have enough classes for Agent (foaf:Agent, foaf:Person, foaf:Organization, org:Organization...)

The name "Contact" is too ambiguous.
More explicit description of the concept : Communication Medium, Communication Channel
If we look at it from the economic view (your phone number depends also on a service provider) view, it could
just be named "foaf:Account".

In fact it's described in Semantic desktop ontology [1] as nco:ContactMedium, but with a restricted
domain, nco:Role, not easily re-usable as FOAF is...

The goal would be to have a class working for a fax number AND for an online account, to be able to add metadata
and privacy options along with the number or account ID itself (rdf:value is used in vcard just for this goal)

<http://example.org/cid/34> a foaf:ContactMedium, v:Cell ;
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Sergio Fernández | 13 Jun 2012 19:59
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc

Dan,

great to finally see 1.0 version! :-)

If you'd like to generate a RDFa version of the spec, maybe you can
give a try to the latest version of specgen, available at
https://github.com/specgen/specgen And, of course, if you have any
issue, just told me.

Cheers,

On 13 June 2012 18:34, Dominique Guardiola <dguardiola <at> quinode.fr> wrote:
>
> Le 13 juin 2012 à 15:44, Dan Brickley a écrit :
>
>>>> Current notes are at
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18sktpEWqREts-IjtrWU6eFXiR_VR3GVX9HPdlazOC0o/edit
>>>
>>> I had no feedback at all about this foaf:Contact idea
>>> in a word : a Class that could act as a superclass for any "mean of contact" RDF class, supposing the need I
exposed (linking metadata to a phone number or an email address without using blank nodes) is shared by others.
>>
>
>> It makes perfect sense and has been proposed in various guises over the years. There is something similar
in schema.org/ContactPoint ...
>
> yes, I looked at schema's ContactPoint before, but it represents rather an Agent than a pure single
"Contact information" thing.
> We have enough classes for Agent (foaf:Agent, foaf:Person, foaf:Organization, org:Organization...)
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Ed - 0x1b, Inc. | 13 Jun 2012 22:20

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Dominique Guardiola
<dguardiola <at> quinode.fr> wrote:
>
> Le 13 juin 2012 à 15:44, Dan Brickley a écrit :
>
>>>> Current notes are at
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18sktpEWqREts-IjtrWU6eFXiR_VR3GVX9HPdlazOC0o/edit
>>>
>>> I had no feedback at all about this foaf:Contact idea
>>> in a word : a Class that could act as a superclass for any "mean of contact" RDF class, supposing the need I
exposed (linking metadata to a phone number or an email address without using blank nodes) is shared by others.
>>
>
>> It makes perfect sense and has been proposed in various guises over the years. There is something similar
in schema.org/ContactPoint ...
>
> yes, I looked at schema's ContactPoint before, but it represents rather an Agent than a pure single
"Contact information" thing.
> We have enough classes for Agent (foaf:Agent, foaf:Person, foaf:Organization, org:Organization...)
>
> The name "Contact" is too ambiguous.
> More explicit description of the concept : Communication Medium, Communication Channel
> If we look at it from the economic view (your phone number depends also on a service provider) view, it could
just be named "foaf:Account".
>
> In fact it's described in Semantic desktop ontology [1] as nco:ContactMedium, but with a restricted
domain, nco:Role, not easily re-usable as FOAF is...
>
> The goal would be to have a class working for a fax number AND for an online account, to be able to add metadata
and privacy options along with the number or account ID itself (rdf:value is used in vcard just for this goal)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dominique Guardiola | 14 Jun 2012 09:50
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


Le 13 juin 2012 à 22:20, Ed - 0x1b, Inc. a écrit :

>> Vcard "parameters types" approach [3] is to define several types to describe your resource, so
regarding Kjetl's "foaf:personal_phone" property, this can be done by combining two classes (v:Home
and v:Tel in the vcard example).
>> Supporting this logic, classes such as foaf:Personal or foaf:Private could be added to avoid creating
countless personal_skypeID, personal_mbox , etc
>> 
>> Regarding all the protocol/brand specific properties ("skypeID", "openID", "jabberID"), one should
be able to re-use another RDF Class, and just add it to its "foaf:OnlineAccount" or "foaf:ContactMedium"
resource to describe it more precisely.
>> 
> 
> Would this be handled differently if it were a direct claim to an
> encryption based identity (aka WebID)  - I would think the lack of
> inter-mediation (no CA) make "foaf:OnlineAccount" a contradiction?
> ContactMedium doesn't really speak to the making of such an assertion
> in my mind, but would that be the best place to put a WebID RDF
> stanza?

In the WebID world, your WebID == your URI, 
you just add in your FOAF file a cert:RSAPublicKey linked by a cert:key from your foaf:Person URI

So your plain old URI becomes a verifiable, "accountable" URI, so all the things asserted can be verified
using a TLS handshake.

OnlineAccount are most of the time URLs to a public profile page (twitter, fb)
So linking to them from your WebID-enabled URI just validate your claim it's your profile.
With WebID becoming mainstream, we can have online services provide linked data such as "here's the WebID
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Henry Story | 14 Jun 2012 10:16

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


On 13 Jun 2012, at 18:34, Dominique Guardiola wrote:

> 
> Le 13 juin 2012 à 15:44, Dan Brickley a écrit :
> 
>>>> Current notes are at
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18sktpEWqREts-IjtrWU6eFXiR_VR3GVX9HPdlazOC0o/edit
>>> 
>>> I had no feedback at all about this foaf:Contact idea
>>> in a word : a Class that could act as a superclass for any "mean of contact" RDF class, supposing the need I
exposed (linking metadata to a phone number or an email address without using blank nodes) is shared by others.
>> 
> 
>> It makes perfect sense and has been proposed in various guises over the years. There is something similar
in schema.org/ContactPoint ...
> 
> yes, I looked at schema's ContactPoint before, but it represents rather an Agent than a pure single
"Contact information" thing. 
> We have enough classes for Agent (foaf:Agent, foaf:Person, foaf:Organization, org:Organization...)
> 
> The name "Contact" is too ambiguous.
> More explicit description of the concept : Communication Medium, Communication Channel
> If we look at it from the economic view (your phone number depends also on a service provider) view, it could
just be named "foaf:Account".
> 
> In fact it's described in Semantic desktop ontology [1] as nco:ContactMedium, but with a restricted
domain, nco:Role, not easily re-usable as FOAF is...
> 
> The goal would be to have a class working for a fax number AND for an online account, to be able to add metadata
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dominique Guardiola | 14 Jun 2012 10:32
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


Le 14 juin 2012 à 10:16, Henry Story a écrit :
>> 
>> <http://example.org/cid/34> a foaf:ContactMedium, v:Cell ;
>> 	rdf:value <tel:+3361513227>;  # using a tel URI[2]
>> 	rdfs:comment "Do not call after 8PM" <at> en
>> 	rdfs:comment "Ne pas déranger après 20h" <at> fr
>> 	dct:modified "2012-05-23"^^xsd:date
> 
> I don't really see the need for this. Just write
> 
>  <tel:+3361513227> rdfs:comment "Do not call after 8PM" <at> en .

Henry, 
this example only works because I used a <tel> uri (tried to be smart here but it plays against me ;) Usually,
phone numbers are given as literals, and that can't be a subject.

The main idea is that keeping this kind of information (contact medium) only as properties prevents us from
attaching useful data to it. 
(In the context of getting rid of blank nodes)

--
Dominique Guardiola, QUINODE
• http://www.quinode.fr/
• Tel : 04.27.86.84.37
• Mob : 06.15.13.22.27
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Henry Story | 14 Jun 2012 10:46

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


On 14 Jun 2012, at 10:32, Dominique Guardiola wrote:

> 
> Le 14 juin 2012 à 10:16, Henry Story a écrit :
>>> 
>>> <http://example.org/cid/34> a foaf:ContactMedium, v:Cell ;
>>> 	rdf:value <tel:+3361513227>;  # using a tel URI[2]
>>> 	rdfs:comment "Do not call after 8PM" <at> en
>>> 	rdfs:comment "Ne pas déranger après 20h" <at> fr
>>> 	dct:modified "2012-05-23"^^xsd:date
>> 
>> I don't really see the need for this. Just write
>> 
>> <tel:+3361513227> rdfs:comment "Do not call after 8PM" <at> en .
> 
> Henry, 
> this example only works because I used a <tel> uri (tried to be smart here but it plays against me ;) Usually,
phone numbers are given as literals, and that can't be a subject.

Well that's a good reason to use tel uris. Foaf:mbox is defined on uris. People who don't use that loose out on
being able to express such things easily. 

> 
> The main idea is that keeping this kind of information (contact medium) only as properties prevents us
from attaching useful data to it. 
> (In the context of getting rid of blank nodes)

Well the tel uri allows you to get rid of blank nodes too
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Dominique Guardiola | 14 Jun 2012 11:07
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 1.0 Planning Doc


Le 14 juin 2012 à 10:46, Henry Story a écrit :

>> The main idea is that keeping this kind of information (contact medium) only as properties prevents us
from attaching useful data to it. 
>> (In the context of getting rid of blank nodes)
> 
> Well the tel uri allows you to get rid of blank nodes too
> 
> <tel:+3361513227> a foafidea:ContactMedium;
>         rdfs:comment "Do not call after 8PM" <at> en;
>         someOnt:tel "+3361513227" .
> 
> Well I suppose there is a difference in that you can't dereference the telephone URI to
> get more information about it...

that's it, you took the words out of my mouth
when contact mediums are available as first-class data citizens, we can do things like getting an update
for this particular phone number without downloading the whole organization/person profile.

I know we must keep a balance between data structuration and KISS, but i'm still amazed to see that something
like contact informations is not seen as valuable enough (read "needs a Class") on the semantic web. For a
lots of web applications (ERP, CRM) it will be !

--
Dominique Guardiola, QUINODE
• http://www.quinode.fr/
• Tel : 04.27.86.84.37
• Mob : 06.15.13.22.27
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |

Gmane