someone mentioned nepomuk,
so these are the ontologies in use at dev.nepomuk.semanticdesktop.org
and partly at nepomuk.kde.org:
the contact ontology:
http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/nco/
there is open source tool support, such as a vcard->nco converter and a
Microsoft Outlook crawler:
http://aperture.sourceforge.net
misses some documentation and examples though, but the update and
maintenance process is there,
we also aim at sustainability, NOKIA uses part of this ontology for the
maemo platform.
best
Leo
It was Peter Mika who said at the right time 06.05.2009 13:43 the
following words:
Hi Martin,
This issue came up at VoCamp in Galway, and we decided to settle it in
general by trying to agree on the mappings of microformats to RDF:
http://semanticweb.org/wiki/Microformats_in_RDF
At least Sindice and our crawler support now the same mappings for the
majority of microformats.
For the specific case of VCard:
http://semanticweb.org/wiki/HCard
We agreed that the proposal for Representing VCard in RDF
<http://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf> by Renato Iannella is NOW DEPRECATED.
The canonical representation of VCard in RDF
<http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#> is also hosted at W3C and
maintained by Harry Halpin and Norm Walsh.
Unfortunately, W3C still has to take the actual step of deprecating
(or even better, moving to archive) the old note.
And again unfortunately, it's the state of the art in the Semantic Web
that people use vocabularies that rank highest in their favorite
search engine. Everything at W3C, no matter how outdated, comes up
high ;)
Best,
Peter
Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Dear all:
As far as I can see, there are now two vCard variants in use - the
original
http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#
and the new one
http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#
Now - which one should data providers and application developers use?
I see the technical advantages of the new variant and the
deficiencies of the old approach. However, a quick SWOOGLE statistics
shows that there are only 470 RDF documents using the new version vs.
233,595 documents using the old version.
How do current Semantic Web applications handle this issue? Do they
honor data expressed in either variant?
I see that Yahoo Searchmonkey, for instance, endorses the new
namespace - what's with others?
We should not irritate potential users of Semantic technology by
already confusing them by two vocabularies for such basic data as
contact details....
Best
Martin
old:
http://swoogle.umbc.edu/index.php?option=com_frontpage&service=digest&queryType=digest_ns&searchString=http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0%23
new:
http://swoogle.umbc.edu/index.php?option=com_frontpage&service=digest&queryType=digest_ns&searchString=http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns%23
--
____________________________________________________
DI Leo Sauermann http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann
Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer
Kuenstliche Intelligenz DFKI GmbH
Trippstadter Strasse 122
P.O. Box 2080 Fon: +49 631 20575-116
D-67663 Kaiserslautern Fax: +49 631 20575-102
Germany Mail: [email protected]
Geschaeftsfuehrung:
Prof.Dr.Dr.h.c.mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
Dr. Walter Olthoff
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
____________________________________________________
