[XESAM] Ontology sketch. Feedback needed.
phreedom.stdin at gmail.com
Wed May 30 08:51:15 PDT 2007
I'd like you to take a look at the ontology sketch
It's not complete. Some fields/classes are dropped intentionally.
I'd like to hear some feedback first.
Points of interest:
*Which properties belong to content and which to source?
*** Multimedia ontology
*** Contact ontology
*** Corner cases:
* Complex file formats like databases, mailboxes.
* Problematic classes like Source code.
*** DataObject properties
These are the most generic ones. We need to decide whether DataObject
implements DC or DC is placed one level lower.
*** Property interitance:
As you may have noticed, there's no sent/recv date for messages and other
obvious fields are missing.
The idea here is that i'ts impractical to mirror all inherited fields in
leaf-level classes. I.e. we could have
contentAuthor<-documentAuthor<-textDocumentAuthor<-sourceCodeAuthor, or we
could use contentAuthor everywhere.
That is property renaming is not a sufficient reason to make a subproperty of
it. All classes/file formats tend to name things quite differently. i.e.
Author can be: composer, coder, sender whatever. But the meaning is the same.
A rule of thumb is that parent and child properties must be essentially
Child must provide some useful and meaningful implications/limitations as
compared to parent e.g.:
* controlled-vocabulary/string format/range limitations
* provide value grouping(generic recipient vs to/cc/bcc in email)
* record provenance(user-assigned keywords vs author's content-embedded
For Email case, sent time = content creation time;
recv time = local copy ceation time(File creation time as repoted by the FS)
More information about the xdg