Hi, I'm looking at updating the Note class used in SemNotes and I could use a second opinion from somebody who knows the ontologies and API better.
Currently the notes are of type pimo:Note. They have the following properties (not exclusively): - title -> dc:title, also sets the nao:prefLabel to the same value - creation time -> nao:created - last write -> nao:lastModified - tags -> nao:hasTag - referenced resources -> pimo:isRelated - content -> semnotes:htmlContent Implementation-wise, the Note class is a subclass of Nepomuk::Resource, but it will be changed to a subclass of Nepomuk::Thing after all this. There are 2 questions: 1. What is the best choice to replace the ugly semnotes:htmlContent property? I would like to replace it with some existing property in an existing ontology. This would allow me to delete the ontology that comes with the application. I thought for a while that pimo:wikiText might do the job, but after some consideration I'm not so sure any more. 2. Should I keep storing the notes in the RDF store or should I use files on disk? Currently the note and all its properties are stored in the repository, including the content. Initially I was expecting that notes would be small, therefore not really worth storing in independent files on disk. But after looking at the way that the few users I know (including myself) take notes, I found that some notes can be quite long and elaborated. That's why I'm now wondering if it wouldn't be better to just store them in files and let Strigi index the files. This way the indexing of note content is not lost. This question makes the first one redundant in a way, because if notes should not be stored in the repository, the semnotes:htmlContent would be anyway removed and the corresponding file would become pimo:groundingOccurence for the note instance. Sorry for the lengthy email :) Thanks for reading, Laura _______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
