FOAF

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • Jure Sah
    #1

    FOAF

    Hello,

    I am trying to get in touch with anyone who used to work on this or is
    perhaps still working on it. All the records I find online are rather
    old and there are no people to contact anywhere.

    Anyhow, I am wondering why FOAF never became more popular and am
    considering various forms of it's practical usage. I have many questions
    about the specification that I never see properly answered on the web
    pages online, thus I will ask some of them here.

    First of all, a single FOAF file is intended to describe a single
    person, right? I can see many situations, where more than one FOAF file
    could be present online to describe a single person (for example when
    FOAF data is automatically extracted from other data sources). How in
    that case, would it be appropriate to link the different FOAF files
    together?

    Second, I am thinking of the case where a FOAF file could be used to
    publish public information about a person from an official source (for
    example a list of FOAF files defining the students of a college). In
    this case, some kind of certificate would have to be used to confirm the
    institution providing the data is to be held responsible for the data's
    accuracy and that the data has been untampered with after the
    institution has published it. How does one combine FOAF and certificates
    in a correct manner?

    Third, in the examples of FOAF files I have seen online, I notice the
    primary structure of the FOAF web is the <foaf:knows>. How would one
    correctly use FOAF to describe different kinds of relationships (for
    example: friends, colleagues, schoolmates) without confusing any
    existing FOAF browsing software?

    Thank you for any answers. :)

    --
    Primary function: Coprocessor
    Secondary function: Cluster commander

    http://www.thought-beacon.net


    Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
    http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah


    We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

    01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
    01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011
    Tags: None
    • Andy Dingley
      #2
      Re: FOAF


      Jure Sah wrote:
      I am trying to get in touch with anyone who used to work on this or is
      perhaps still working on it. All the records I find online are rather
      old and there are no people to contact anywhere.
      All the people are still there, and generally still in Bristol, if not
      at ILRT (try buying beer in the Highbury Vaults!)

      Anyhow, I am wondering why FOAF never became more popular
      It did, but like most SemWeb stuff it's hidden "under the hood".
      First of all, a single FOAF file is intended to describe a single
      person, right?
      FOAF is RDF, so frees itself from XML concepts like "file". It's a
      small problem to manipulate multiple entities in one document and a big
      problem to manage one entity described across many documents. RDF tools
      solve nearly all of this for you, and transparently. This is why it's
      important to use something like Jena rather than document-based XML
      tools.

      The rest is just an exercise in web searching. Try identifying the
      obvious author names, then tracking down their current projects.

        Comment

        • Jure Sah
          #3
          Re: FOAF

          Andy Dingley pravi:
          >I am trying to get in touch with anyone who used to work on this or is
          >perhaps still working on it. All the records I find online are rather
          >old and there are no people to contact anywhere.
          >
          All the people are still there, and generally still in Bristol, if not
          at ILRT (try buying beer in the Highbury Vaults!)
          Which country already?
          >Anyhow, I am wondering why FOAF never became more popular
          >
          It did, but like most SemWeb stuff it's hidden "under the hood".
          ....and unused.
          >First of all, a single FOAF file is intended to describe a single
          >person, right?
          >
          FOAF is RDF, so frees itself from XML concepts like "file". It's a
          small problem to manipulate multiple entities in one document and a big
          problem to manage one entity described across many documents. RDF tools
          solve nearly all of this for you, and transparently. This is why it's
          important to use something like Jena rather than document-based XML
          tools.
          You're asking me to use a Java library? Hmm, right, I think I understand
          why all my friends hate XML now...

          Not to mention, it really doesn't answer my question. I don't use "XML
          tools", document or otherwise, unless you count VI as one. I simply
          recognize the possibility of there being more than one source of
          information for describing a certain someone. The obvious solution is to
          use a FAT (or should I say XAT? *g*), but how exactly does one use RDF
          to form this kind of structure?
          The rest is just an exercise in web searching. Try identifying the
          obvious author names, then tracking down their current projects.
          You could have just summed up your entire post into "RTFM" then.

          --
          Primary function: Coprocessor
          Secondary function: Cluster commander

          http://www.thought-beacon.net


          Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
          http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah


          We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

          01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
          01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

            Comment

            • Andy Dingley
              #4
              Re: FOAF

              Jure Sah wrote:
              You're asking me to use a Java library? Hmm, right, I think I understand
              why all my friends hate XML now...
              XML has processing tools in almost any language. RDF is a couple of
              years newer and has been developed by fewer people, so there are as yet
              fewer language bindings for it. If you want one, write one.

              The popular stuff is in Java, This is because:

              !. All the cool kids were using Java

              2. Jena is in Java.

              3. Protege is in Java.

              As Java works, is popular, and the two favourite RDF tools are using
              it, then why move away ? If you use Redland instead of Jena then
              you've access from C++ or Python. You're welcome to use anything else
              you fancy, it's just that the rest of us are already happily sat in one
              corner.

              Not to mention, it really doesn't answer my question. I don't use "XML
              tools", document or otherwise, unless you count VI as one.
              If you insist on only seeing the world as a linear text document
              through a fairly crude character-based editor, then you're never going
              to get very far managing triples. Things are harder now, user
              interfaces are fatter. If we're going to work with this world, then
              we're going to need fatter tools. Download a copy of Protege and have a
              play with some of the newer plugins for that.
              You could have just summed up your entire post into "RTFM" then.
              Really I wish I had.

                Comment

                • Jure Sah
                  #5
                  Re: FOAF

                  Andy Dingley pravi:
                  As Java works, is popular, and the two favourite RDF tools are using
                  it, then why move away ? If you use Redland instead of Jena then
                  you've access from C++ or Python. You're welcome to use anything else
                  you fancy, it's just that the rest of us are already happily sat in one
                  corner.
                  Because nowadays everybody is using some high level language, which is
                  based on another high level language, which is based on another high
                  level language, which is based on another high level language, which is
                  based on another high level language, which is based on another high
                  level language, which is based on another high level language, which is
                  based on another high level language. And the code at the core is bloated.

                  Or that is the definition of anything running on a computer nowadays.
                  I've been working in the area of artificial intelligence for 3 years and
                  I have come to realize the only reason why many things "can't be done"
                  is not because the computers aren't up to it, it's because all the code
                  we have today are workarounds around workarounds around workarounds that
                  don't really need to be there in the first place.

                  In short: You're missing the world of what can be done and limiting the
                  capabilities of future implementations by getting at this problem the
                  way you are.
                  >Not to mention, it really doesn't answer my question. I don't use "XML
                  >tools", document or otherwise, unless you count VI as one.
                  >
                  If you insist on only seeing the world as a linear text document
                  through a fairly crude character-based editor, then you're never going
                  to get very far managing triples. Things are harder now, user
                  interfaces are fatter. If we're going to work with this world, then
                  we're going to need fatter tools. Download a copy of Protege and have a
                  play with some of the newer plugins for that.
                  It's not one bit about the editing tool, mind you. If you really knew
                  what you were doing, you could do FOAF, RDF or XML with a pencil onto a
                  piece of paper just fine. But then again you don't find people who
                  really know their stuff enough to be capable of explaining it, yellin'
                  "RTFM" around whenever asked for assistance.

                  Taking your abstraction levels in there you're just practicing narrow
                  vision yourself.

                  --
                  Primary function: Coprocessor
                  Secondary function: Cluster commander

                  http://www.thought-beacon.net


                  Pay once per lifetime webhosting:
                  http://farcomm-it.com/?ref=jsah


                  We are the paragon of humanity. You may worship us. From afar.

                  01010010 01100101 01110011 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01110100
                  01000010 01000001 01010011 01001001 01000011

                    Comment

                    • Andy Dingley
                      #6
                      Re: FOAF

                      On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 20:06:18 +0200, Jure Sah <admin@though t-beacon.net>
                      wrote:
                      >I've been working in the area of artificial intelligence for 3 years and
                      >I have come to realize the only reason why many things "can't be done"
                      >is not because the computers aren't up to it, it's because all the code
                      >we have today are workarounds around workarounds around workarounds that
                      >don't really need to be there in the first place.
                      So write everything from scratch in assembler. Or save a little effort,
                      pick a nice bytecode language to work in (an interpreted machinecode is
                      still prety efficient) and write it in Java bytecode.

                      If it's just _efficiency_ that's the problem, then wait a few years and
                      let Moore's Law catch up.

                      Or maybe you've got entirely the wrong end of the stick, and you're just
                      wondering why everyone else is at the other end of it ?

                      --
                      Cats have nine lives, which is why they rarely post to Usenet.

                        Comment

                        • pascal.grouselle@gmail.com
                          #7
                          Re: FOAF

                          Jure Sah a écrit :
                          Third, in the examples of FOAF files I have seen online, I notice the
                          primary structure of the FOAF web is the <foaf:knows>. How would one
                          correctly use FOAF to describe different kinds of relationships (for
                          example: friends, colleagues, schoolmates) without confusing any
                          existing FOAF browsing software?
                          You need to use another vocabulary : http://vocab.org/relationship/
                          within your FOAF file. With this vocabulary, you can say : this person
                          whom I know is a colleague, or a neighbor of mine, etc.

                          To see how to declare this vocabulary in the beginning of your FOAF and
                          how to use it, have a look on my FOAF file ;-)
                          http://perso.orange.fr/pascal.grouselle/foaf.rdf


                            Comment

                            Previous template Next
                            Working...