[Standards-JIG] Re: JEP-0054 vcard email definition is inconsistent

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Wed Sep 15 03:50:08 UTC 2004


In article <20040915033423.GH25704 at dev.xaoza.net>, trejkaz at xaoza.net 
wrote:

> At Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 09:58:35AM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > I haven't looked at FOAF in about a year so I need to find out what it 
> > supports now, and how we might add new properties to it (the FOAFsters 
> > don't have a nice community standards process like we do in the JEP 
> > series). I don't see how you can keep RDF out of it, since FOAF is 
> > defined as an RDF vocabulary, but we would certainly use the RDF/XML 
> > syntax and there are more RDF parsers now than there were 14 months ago. 
> > That may not help small-footprint clients, but then again most of them 
> > aren't implementing the full protocol suite either. 
> 
> As far as I meant when I said keeping RDF, was that the majority of FOAF
> documents out there on the web have an RDF element with a single foaf:Person
> element inside it.  But we're really only describing a person, so we should
> only need that one element.

Actually, I think we'd want to use the same protocol for describing 
things other than persons, too: chatrooms, servers, bots, and a whole 
range of other entities on the network. But I agree that we'd probably 
need only one element at a time.

/psa




More information about the Standards mailing list