Hi Florent, On Tue, 2010-02-16 at 23:59 +0100, THEVENET Florent wrote: > I'm very interested in NCO ontology and I saw the modifications you made > from the original Nepomuk ontology. > I must say that of not very fond of some of these changes. First because > you seems to assume that only IM clients and mail apps will use NCO. > Then because with the IMContact class you lost semantic meaning. Finally > because I don't understand the need for an MetaContact thing, while > Nepomuk's ontology has a powerful ContactMedium class.
It looks like you've missed the most recent NCO changes¹ we did last week. Among other things, it drops IMContact and MetaContact. It should be a lot more consistent with how email addresses and phone numbers are handled in Nepomuk upstream. > First, we should create a nco:ServiceAccount class, a subclass of > nco:ContactMedium. It describes a (web)service on which contacts are > registered when linked to any nco:Role. When linked to contact-me it > represents a web(service) on which I'm registered and from where my > contacts can come. Adding support for more than just email and instant messaging certainly makes sense. We just haven't worked on this so far. Jürg ¹ http://git.gnome.org/browse/tracker/commit/?id=8156ca933a10ef995ca1ef62bfe91699ab3bcef7 _______________________________________________ tracker-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/tracker-list
