Does anyone have any more views on the current situation?
I don't want to delay any current work progress.....and if the answer
is, let them just use the Ontology, then lets...
(I also plan to look at vCard 4.0 to do an closer RDF mapping to
it....but that is later work...)
Renato
On 7 Aug 2009, at 22:24, Renato Iannella wrote:
Martin, I started to put the two together:
http://spin.nicta.org.au/vcardrdf/vcard-rdf-2009.html
That's when I send the email asking some questions:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jun/0146.html
I'm really stuck on the structure for multiple property values which
vCard supports.
Which is what is in the NOTE, but not in the Ontology, and mentioned
here:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jun/0147.html
I suppose if you are after just the ontology - and not a "faithful"
mapping of the vCard semantics - then it would be easiest to just
use the current ontology:
http://developer.yahoo.com/searchmonkey/smguide/vcard-details.html
Cheers... Renato Iannella
NICTA
Cheers... Renato Iannella
NICTA
