<div>2007/5/30, Evgeny Egorochkin <<a href="mailto:phreedom.stdin@gmail.com">phreedom.stdin@gmail.com</a>>:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Hi all, I'd like you to take a look at the ontology sketch <a href="http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/PhreedomDraft?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=viz.png">http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/PhreedomDraft?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=viz.png </a> It's not complete. Some fields/classes are dropped intentionally. I'd like to hear some feedback first. Points of interest: *** Sources         *Source hierarchy         *Which properties belong to content and which to source? </blockquote><div>  </div>I was just  scanning through <a href="http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/%7Emylka/nie.pdf" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~mylka/nie.pdf </a>. As far as I can read in Nepomuk DataSource does not derive from DataObject. Also it states that a DataObject is something where you can physically retrieve some bytes in some way or other. Taking this into account I don't think it makes sense to let User derive from DataObject either. Personally I would prefer to have a field Category and a field Source, but I know from IRC that this will cause trouble in some implementations, but I would like to have this stuff discussed on-the-record so to speak; so please chime in with your concerns regarding this. Cheers, Mikkel PS: Sorry for sending this twice Evgeny, my touchpad is playing tricks on me :-) </div>