[rdfweb-dev] Proposal: Names in FoaF

[Morten Frederiksen]

Dan Brickley <danbri at w3.org> wrote:
>I have been thinking about a compromise:
>
>Perhaps we've been too ambitious, seeking a single 
>set of vocabulary terms that will augment foaf:name in a way
>that works for everyone on the planet.
>
>It seems clear that foaf:givenName and foaf:familyName (or 
>somesuch) won't work for many many people. But also that 
>there are a fair number of people who could be usefully 
>described in this way.
>
>How about we simply back away from the assumption that there 
>is a one-size fits all solution, while leaving the western-ish
>vocab in FOAF for those who have a use for it, and welcoming
>suggestions for further vocab that'll describe non-western naming
>patterns. These could be part of FOAF or in separate vocabularies;
>either works for me.
I'm not quite sure what you are suggesting, but to keep foaf:surname
etc. seems to be a bad idea - the purpose of bug #7 was to clear up the
issues, and doing nothing doesn't seem to do that. The proposed model
actually should cover everybody, at least there has been no evidence to
the contrary (note that one can also use foaf:namePart somewhere in the
sequence for a non-specified part of a name).

An alternative suggestion:
Keep foaf:name (and foaf:nick), add a literal foaf:sortableName (or
something like that, e.g. "Brickley, Dan") and drop the rest, leaving
the detailed modelling to another vocabulary (and namespace), perhaps
one that could build on my first proposal.

This would solve the sorting issues and not force everyone into a
western style (or feel left out).


Regards,
Morten Frederiksen
--- 
8 of 10 people suffer hemorrhoids the other 2 enjoy them.
-- 
<URL: http://xml.mfd-consult.dk/foaf/explorer/?foaf=morten.rdf >