[oslc-cm] Fw: [oslc-core] Fw: foaf:Person vs sioc:User for dc:creator or oslc_cm:owner ?

[Steve K Speicher]

Cross-posting Dave's response from oslc-core group to the oslc-cm list

Thanks,
Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645

Dave wrote on 03/05/2010 02:03:31 PM:

> 
> What are we trying to accomplish with the dc:creator and owner fields?
> 
> Are we trying to solve a distributed identify problem or simply trying
> to use the right model for givenName, familyName, emailAddress type
> information? I believe we should do the latter in the 1st version of
> the Core spec, but I agree that we may also need to do the former at
> some point. At this point we have the notion of a user account, but no
> notion of a "live person identifier" and I think we have to live with
> that at least for v1.
> 
> For simple username information the FOAF fields are sufficient and I
> believe a foaf:Person resource should be in the Core spec along with a
> set of person properties. Actually, there are in the draft now.
> 
> In my opinion the Core spec should define a set of "core properties"
> and the datatypes for each (e.g. foaf:Person for dc:creator), but that
> individual specs should be free to override these on a case-by-case
> basis.
> 
> - Dave
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Steve K Speicher <sspeiche at us.ibm.com> 
wrote:
> > Thought the core WG should weigh in on this one.   Olivier has a fair
> > amount of experience with this and some good points to consider.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645
> >
> > ----- Forwarded by Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM on 03/05/2010 08:10 AM
> > From:
> > Olivier Berger <olivier.berger at it-sudparis.eu>
> > To:
> > "oslc-cm at open-services.net" <oslc-cm at open-services.net>
> > Date:
> > 03/05/2010 05:43 AM
> > Subject:
> > [oslc-cm] foaf:Person vs sioc:User for dc:creator or oslc_cm:owner ?
> >
> > I've had a look at
> > http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmResourceDefinitionsV2 and it
> > seems that foaf:Person is preferred at the moment for describing
> > reporters/owners of CRs.
> >
> > I'm not sure this is the best choice, and would propose to use 
sioc:User
> > instead.
> >
> > When reading :
> > "General agreement on foaf:Person is enough as there are not too many
> > systems that have multiple accounts per user. Can be managed by having
> > separate person instances (exception, instead of the rule)"
> > I'm puzzled...
> >
> > sioc:User is already there to manage the situation of several accounts
> > (sioc:Users) of the same physical person (foaf:Person).
> >
> > Why chose the least suitable one when there's one more flexible ? ;)
> >
> > Is this to avoid dependency on sioc and limit to foaf ?
> >
> > foaf:Person seems well suited when dealing with real physical persons,
> > whereas sioc:User is more about accounts/aliases/nicks of potentially
> > anonymous personalities of these real people.
> >
> > Also, when thinking about automation, I believe dc:creators couls be
> > robots/apps, where sioc:User may be preferred to foaf:Persons too ;)
> >
> > In any case, sioc seems more actively maintained than foaf, IMHO, so 
it
> > may be preferred maybe.
> >
> > Any comments ?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > P.S.: I'm in the process of drafting a forge ontology :
> > https://forge.projet-coclico.org/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/wp2/
> index.php/Forge_Ontology_Proposal
> > which should be interoperable with OSLC-CM, hence my recent 
investigatiosn
> > of sioc vs foaf.
> > --
> > Olivier BERGER <olivier.berger at it-sudparis.eu>
> > http://www-public.it-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 
2048R/5819D7E8
> > Ingénieur Recherche - Dept INF
> > Institut TELECOM, SudParis (http://www.it-sudparis.eu/), Evry (France)