<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rdf:RDF
      xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
      xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
      xmlns:sioc="http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#"
      xmlns:sioct="http://rdfs.org/sioc/types#"
      xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
      xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
      xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
      xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/">
<foaf:Document rdf:about=''>
  <dc:title>SIOC profile for 'sioc-project.org'</dc:title>
  <dc:description>A SIOC profile describes the structure and contents of a community site (e.g., weblog) in a machine processable form. For more information refer to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://rdfs.org/sioc&quot;&gt;SIOC project page&lt;/a&gt;</dc:description>
  <foaf:primaryTopic rdf:resource="http://sioc-project.org/node/134"/>
  <admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://drupal.org/project/sioc"/>
</foaf:Document>
<sioc:Post rdf:about="http://sioc-project.org/node/134">
  <dc:title>User vs. Person complexity</dc:title>
  <sioc:content>Hi all!
The Captn has chased me around at #foaf for an extended period, and I
know that you have a deadline for submission coming up RSN.
I&#039;m the one who has done the semweb stuff at my.opera.com, and I&#039;d like
to express my support for what you&#039;re doing. Also, I think we will
implement SIOC at my.opera.com as time allows, and I think we will
support your W3C submission.
Now, I have to realize that I will not have the time to write the more
elaborate discussion of the spec before your deadline, but I guess a
not-very well thought out post is better than none, so here we go, and
please bear over with me if I address issues that have allready been
beaten to death earlier.
I can certainly see the value of the sioc:User/foaf:Person distinction
in SIOC. It is the nature of community sites that we do not really know
too much about the user who&#039;s publishing things, &quot;on the Internet,
nobody knows you&#039;re a dog&quot; thus making foaf:Person alltogether rather
inappropriate for community sites ;-) Also, it is difficult verify that
a user isn&#039;t two or more persons or just a bot.
Now, I&#039;m not arguing that we shouldn&#039;t use foaf:Person, quite the
contrary. Using sioc:User as a wrapper around foaf:Person introduces
some additional complexity, and I&#039;m not sure it is worth it. Instead
agents may just need to be a little more careful when making inferences
based on data from a community site.
Also, I think it becomes quite difficult to know when to use the SIOC
mbox and when to use the FOAF mbox, or both. Do I really need to use
verify that the user is a person to use the FOAF properties, or?
So, that&#039;s my main concern, have you guys thought about it?
Now, I suppose that the specification is not set in stone with the
submission to the W3C, so this is perhaps a discussion that could
proceed after the submission?
Cheers,
Kjetil
--
Kjetil Kjernsmo
Information Systems Developer
Opera Software ASA
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &quot;SIOC-Dev&quot; group.
To post to this group, send email to sioc-dev@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sioc-dev-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sioc-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
</sioc:content>
  <dcterms:created>2006-09-12T10:00:46+01:00</dcterms:created>
  <dcterms:modified>2006-09-11T16:25:21+01:00</dcterms:modified>
  <sioc:link rdf:resource="http://sioc-project.org/node/134" rdfs:label="User vs. Person complexity" />
  <sioc:topic rdf:resource="http://sioc-project.org/taxonomy/term/13" rdfs:label="Developers" />
  <sioc:has_creator rdf:resource="http://sioc-project.org/sioc/user/58%2523user" rdfs:seeAlso="http://sioc-project.org/sioc/user/58" />
</sioc:Post>
</rdf:RDF>