[rdfweb-dev] Serious question about silly attributes

[Julian Bond]

Dan Brickley <danbri at w3.org> wrote:
>Aside: FOAF itself has not been marketed to date, on purpose,
>because it has many characteristics that suggest a risk of a scary
>network effect adoption curve, and we're not ready for that.

Rather than asking when we will be ready, I'll ask what needs to be done
first? Because the marketing is happening anyway.

[major snippage]

I have thought that FOAF should be stripped right down to the bone. What
if there was this and this only.
foaf:Person
 foaf:name            //A human readable name for this foaf:Person not
                        necessarily for the real world person
 foaf:mbox_sha1sum    //A universally unique key for this foaf:Person
 foaf:knows
   foaf:Person
     foaf:name
     foaf:mbox_sha1sum

with *everything* else in a collection of namespaces. Has this already
been considered? This lets all the arguments about how to code up Chat,
Address, True Names, Keywords, Purity, etc, etc be spun out into their
own data domains.

-- 
Julian Bond Email&MSM: julian.bond at voidstar.com
Webmaster:              http://www.ecademy.com/
Personal WebLog:       http://www.voidstar.com/
M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173   T: +44 (0)192 0412 433