On Saturday 29 August 2009 04:52:44 Hari krishna Anandhan wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Sebastian Trüg<tr...@kde.org> wrote: > > The idea is to not annotate the resource itself but a related pimo:Thing. > > This makes perfect sense for resources like contacts, addressbook entries > > and IM accounts which can be merged under one pimo:Person representing > > the real world person. > > > > However in the case of plain files I am not sure if we gain that much. > > +1 for making files standalone... > > But, I think everything should be associated with a Thing. Whether it > is aggregated to form a new abstract thing (isPartOf relationship), or > whether it is just annotated as a Thing (isA relationship), can be > determined with the following criteria: > > Can it standalone? > When we look at an email id, or an address, we immediately think of > whom that belongs to. So, they cannot stand alone. So, we aggregate > them to a new abstract thing, Person. > But, for files, they standalone as they have file extensions > (documents, pictures, etc). The only extra information that might be > useful is "what type they actually represent". So, we just annotate > their type to a Thing (say, Invoice). This will enable people to keep > annotating their files directly, and also to give additional meaning > to the file (like setting the type of document as invoice, etc) when > needed... > > Does it make sense?
this is pretty much what I thought, too. _______________________________________________ nepomuk-kde mailing list nepomuk-kde@semanticdesktop.org http://lists.semanticdesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk-kde
