Comments on: Implementing and visualizing relationships between Talk Digger’s SIOC and FOAF documents http://fgiasson.com/blog/index.php/2006/06/08/implementing_and_visualizing_relationshi/ Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:06:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Fred http://fgiasson.com/blog/index.php/2006/06/08/implementing_and_visualizing_relationshi/#comment-541 Fred Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:34:28 +0000 #comment-541 Hi John,<br /> <br /> Yeah great. Personally I like account_of. The semantic is good, in fact, we are talking about an account (a sioc:User), so this is the "account_of" a person (foaf: Person).<br /> <br /> Keep up the good work with the SIOC ontology, it's sure that I'll do my best to help it grows. I will be a pleasure to help you if you need any!<br /> <br /> <br /> Take care,<br /> <br /> Salutations,<br /> <br /> <br /> Fred Hi John,

Yeah great. Personally I like account_of. The semantic is good, in fact, we are talking about an account (a sioc:User), so this is the “account_of” a person (foaf: Person).

Keep up the good work with the SIOC ontology, it’s sure that I’ll do my best to help it grows. I will be a pleasure to help you if you need any!

Take care,

Salutations,

Fred

]]> By: Cloud http://fgiasson.com/blog/index.php/2006/06/08/implementing_and_visualizing_relationshi/#comment-540 Cloud Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:41:12 +0000 #comment-540 Cool - well seeAlso is the best you can do for now :) But we've petitioned for the accountOf property; failing that we can point out from SIOC to FOAF using account_of or account_holder or something that would be a logical inverse to holdsAccount... Cool - well seeAlso is the best you can do for now :) But we’ve petitioned for the accountOf property; failing that we can point out from SIOC to FOAF using account_of or account_holder or something that would be a logical inverse to holdsAccount…

]]> By: Fred http://fgiasson.com/blog/index.php/2006/06/08/implementing_and_visualizing_relationshi/#comment-539 Fred Fri, 09 Jun 2006 13:38:27 +0000 #comment-539 Hi John!<br /> <br /> the sioc:has_buddy would have sense because it would be the users that knows each others in a closed system.<br /> <br /> The thing is that in Talk Digger, the foaf:knows property doesn't only link people that know each other in the Talk Digger community, it also give the possibility to its users to foaf:knows someone outside the community. So, if you take a closer look at the foaf file, you will see that "fgiasson" know not only people from Talk Digger.<br /> <br /> Considering that difference, I think that the sioc:has_buddy make senses.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> For the sioc:User and foaf:Person thing, the problem is that there is no such properties right now. So, does it makes sense to use the rdfs:seeAlso property? In fact, the sioc:User is a resource and the foaf:Person is another resource. So [sioc:User -- rdfs:seeAlso --> foaf:Person] make sense (in my opinion) because the foaf:Person resource "add information" to the sioc:User resource (if we take a look at the rdfs:seeAlso definition, it is what it is intended too).<br /> <br /> <br /> It's sad for the SVG. Do you know how I could convert them in PNG, JPEG or GIF file? I took 1 or 2 hours without any success ehehhe.<br /> <br /> thanks!<br /> <br /> salutations,<br /> <br /> Fred Hi John!

the sioc:has_buddy would have sense because it would be the users that knows each others in a closed system.

The thing is that in Talk Digger, the foaf:knows property doesn’t only link people that know each other in the Talk Digger community, it also give the possibility to its users to foaf:knows someone outside the community. So, if you take a closer look at the foaf file, you will see that “fgiasson” know not only people from Talk Digger.

Considering that difference, I think that the sioc:has_buddy make senses.

For the sioc:User and foaf:Person thing, the problem is that there is no such properties right now. So, does it makes sense to use the rdfs:seeAlso property? In fact, the sioc:User is a resource and the foaf:Person is another resource. So [sioc:User -- rdfs:seeAlso --> foaf:Person] make sense (in my opinion) because the foaf:Person resource “add information” to the sioc:User resource (if we take a look at the rdfs:seeAlso definition, it is what it is intended too).

It’s sad for the SVG. Do you know how I could convert them in PNG, JPEG or GIF file? I took 1 or 2 hours without any success ehehhe.

thanks!

salutations,

Fred

]]> By: Cloud http://fgiasson.com/blog/index.php/2006/06/08/implementing_and_visualizing_relationshi/#comment-538 Cloud Fri, 09 Jun 2006 11:01:45 +0000 #comment-538 Hi Fred - I was worried that that loop was a problem but having two sioc:User accounts associated with foaf:Person(s) that are friends is okay :) We did initially have sioc:knows which was a duplication of the FOAF term so was dropped, and thought about having sioc:has_buddy or something for buddy lists, but it's the Person associated with the account that would know someone, not the account itself so the way you have done it makes sense.<br /> <br /> As regards the link from sioc:User to foaf:Person, it is being talked about on the rdfweb-dev list. Also, see http://b4mad.net/datenbrei/archives/2006/06/09/no-loopback-from-siocuser-to-foafperson/<br /> <br /> I can't see your SVGs unfortunately, can't seem to zoom in - might try another client...<br /> <br /> Talk soon,<br /> <br /> John.<br /> -- Hi Fred - I was worried that that loop was a problem but having two sioc:User accounts associated with foaf:Person(s) that are friends is okay :) We did initially have sioc:knows which was a duplication of the FOAF term so was dropped, and thought about having sioc:has_buddy or something for buddy lists, but it’s the Person associated with the account that would know someone, not the account itself so the way you have done it makes sense.

As regards the link from sioc:User to foaf:Person, it is being talked about on the rdfweb-dev list. Also, see http://b4mad.net/datenbrei/archives/2006/06/09/no-loopback-from-siocuser-to-foafperson/

I can’t see your SVGs unfortunately, can’t seem to zoom in - might try another client…

Talk soon,

John.
–

]]>