Sorry forgot the most important part :) ----------------
Hi all, I'd like you to take a look at the ontology sketch http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/PhreedomDraft?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=viz.png It's not complete. Some fields/classes are dropped intentionally. I'd like to hear some feedback first. Points of interest: *** Sources *Source hierarchy *Which properties belong to content and which to source? *** Multimedia ontology *** Contact ontology *** Corner cases: * Complex file formats like databases, mailboxes. * Problematic classes like Source code. *** DataObject properties These are the most generic ones. We need to decide whether DataObject implements DC or DC is placed one level lower. *** Property interitance: As you may have noticed, there's no sent/recv date for messages and other obvious fields are missing. The idea here is that i'ts impractical to mirror all inherited fields in leaf-level classes. I.e. we could have contentAuthor<-documentAuthor<-textDocumentAuthor<-sourceCodeAuthor, or we could use contentAuthor everywhere. That is property renaming is not a sufficient reason to make a subproperty of it. All classes/file formats tend to name things quite differently. i.e. Author can be: composer, coder, sender whatever. But the meaning is the same. A rule of thumb is that parent and child properties must be essentially different. Child must provide some useful and meaningful implications/limitations as compared to parent e.g.: * controlled-vocabulary/string format/range limitations * provide value grouping(generic recipient vs to/cc/bcc in email) * record provenance(user-assigned keywords vs author's content-embedded keywords) For Email case, sent time = content creation time; recv time = local copy ceation time(File creation time as repoted by the FS) --Evgeny
<<attachment: viz.png>>
_______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
