Hi, Scott. Appendix A says this, >> "There is an additional constraint for foaf:Person. Implementations MUST specify either a non-empty foaf:name value or both a non-empty foaf:givenName and foaf:familyName values." [1]
A lot of providers don't require a real name when creating user IDs. ClearQuest is one example. I'm not sure how to handle this case as it's a MUST per the spec. Also I share Ian's concern that this is potentially sensitive information. Best Regards, Sam [1] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecAppendixA?sortcol=table;table=up#foaf_Person_Resource From: Scott Bosworth/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS To: [email protected] Date: 08/25/2010 05:13 PM Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Question on use of foaf:Person Sent by: [email protected] Hi Ian - I wonder if you've picked up the most recent guidance in the Core from Appendix A on the dcterms:contributor and dcterms:creator common properties [1]? I think you'll find that the Core signals that your preference of: <dcterms:contributor rdf:resource=" https://doors.example.com/jazz/users/img"/> is perfectly acceptable. Not sure if that makes the rest of your question moot or not, but I'd be interested in the answer to your question to jazz-aware readers. Also Ian, interested to know what is making you conclude that a name is required property? I noticed that Speicher's recent example of a foaf shape [2] indicates this with an occurs value of "Exactly-one", but the Core common properties table in Appendix A indicates name is not required (occurs = zero-or-one). Steve, looks like the occurs values for all of the foaf properties in your CM Shapes examples are out of sync with the Core appendix? [1] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/OSLCCoreSpecAppendixA [2] http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2Shapes > Hello there, > I understood there was some ongoing discussion about use of foaf:Person - > some of the Person attributes were mandatory (and this outwith Shape, and > also beyond what FOAF itself describes). Also, requiring a name, or some > other potentially sensitive information in a REQUIRED property might cause > alarm and/or willfully degenerate names ("ANOther") that are misleading. > This seems unnecessary - are we happy that the spec REQUIRES a name? > > A related question for jazz-aware readers: what is the recommended OSLC > foaf:Person representation of a Jazz user with URI > https://doors.example.com/jazz/users/img? > > In my examples i was inclined to write > > <foaf:Person rdf:about="https://doors.example.com/jazz/users/img";> > <foaf:name>Ian Green</foaf:name> > </foaf:Person> > > Is this reasonable? But really, and to my first point about, i think i > might prefer > <dcterms:contributor > rdf:resource="https://doors.example.com/jazz/users/img"/> > > which is what was possible in the RM V1 specification. > > best wishes, > -ian > Scott Bosworth | IBM Rational CTO Team | [email protected] | 919.486.2197(w) | 919.244.3387(m) | 919.254.5271(f) _______________________________________________ Oslc-Core mailing list [email protected] http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
