foaf (6 out of 6)

Useful notes by Tom Morris about mf2 to RDF mapping on the microformats wiki. I updated the namespace to use the one suggested there (http://microformats.org/profile/).

Everything starting with h- looks like it's a class. Typically RDF classes are capitalised so this makes me cringe, but I'll cope.

Woah, there are a lot of properties. Seventy unique properties. I didn't realise. On the wiki most don't have a description, many are duplicated in the list, and none of them seem to have their own description page (and thus no URIs to refer to them with). Pasting them into a spreadsheet was the quickest way to de-dup and alphabetise them. Now I'm working through one at a time, adding descriptions and mapping them to existing properties in FOAF (because many are obvious), VCard (because many (all?) are derived from this), ActivityStreams 2.0 (because SocialWebWG) and hesitantly Dublin Core and SIOC. Where they map to something well-described in RDF, I don't bother with rdfs:comment and domain and range of their own, but I'll add for those with no good sameAs mappings.

Is dt-reviewed same as dt-published? If not, why do reviews get special treatment with regards to differentiation between when they're written and published, and nothing else does?
Is there an official definition of e-content? Couldn't find one on the wiki, so made one up that is compatible with AS2.0 content, with additional caveat about including markup, which is explicit on the mf2 wiki: "The contents of something like a post, including markup and embedded elements."
Are e-description and e-instructions sub-properties of e-content?

I keep getting caught out by AS2.0 terms that are in the JSON-LD document but are actually deprecated (the JSON-LD contains no information other than property and class names and sometimes types; I have to remember to check the written docs). Eg. as2:author -> as2:attributedTo.

I couldn't find an AS2.0 equivalent property for category. Am I missing something? Oh wait, tag will do it.
How does p-description from p-summary?
Wiki says p-education should contain a nested h-card (of school and location). Doesn't that mean it should be an e- or have I misunderstood that completely?
It also says p-education is "an education h-calendar event" but h-calendar doesn't exist, it's h-event. Probably just a typo? Ditto p-experience.
ActivityStreams2.0 doesn't have a name property for Actors (only displayName). Interesting.
Wiki says label 'new in vCard4' but vCard4 says it's deprecated, and in any case was for address labels, so not sure what use this is in mf2.
What's p-note for specifically?
Why is p-reviewer not just p-author?
Maybe I just don't know how to read the vCard4 spec, but the mf2 wiki says sex and gender-identity are part of it, but all I can see is hasGender.

AS2.0 has rating but it's explicitly defined as "a non-negative decimal number between 0.0 and 5.0 (inclusive) with one decimal place of precision". MF2 says it's a number between 1 and 5. I think even less specification is better, as ratings come in come in many forms. Anyway, because I'm not venturing into SKOS, I'm owl:sameAsing them for the time being.

Update: Dropped all domains and ranges because all properties in microformats2 are actually global.

🏷 http://vocab.amy.so/blog#Doing http://vocab.amy.so/blog#Doing activitystreams as2 foaf hacking indieweb json-ld linked data mf2 microformats2 ontologies ontology owl rdf socialwg vcard w3c

Sun 22nd of March 2015 at 3:00pm (+00:00)

Last modified: Tue 28th of April 2015 at 5:49pm (+01:00)

FOAF isPrimaryTopicOf... not FOAF primaryTopicOf... note to self.

🏷 http://vocab.amy.so/blog#Done http://vocab.amy.so/blog#Done foaf linked data note to self ontology pedantry primary topic

Sun 15th of February 2015 at 4:11pm (+00:00)

Notes about Semantic Web tools for online communities

K. Faith Lawrence & Dr. Monica Schrafel (2007) Amateur Fiction Online - The Web of Community Trust: **A Case Study in Community Focused Design for the Semantic Web. Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia (IAM) Group, School of Electronics and Computer Science, **University of Southampton.

NB. Need to read her full thesis, of the same name. Will probably clear up some of the questions I scribbled whilst reading the paper.

Finding out if Semantic Web tools can be brought to hobbyist groups on the Web.

Uses the online fiction community; suggests they could benefit from:
- improved searching
- improved meta data
- automatic recommendations
- trust webs
- personalisation.
A HCI project, so usability tests and comparisons with current systems are key.

Related work

Community centered design
- to determine user needs - through continual interactions and user studies.
- to consider how reader-facing apps present themselves and particular community
  - responsibility of being a portal - need clear affordences and points of failure.
Trust and Semantic Communities
- The semantic web “provides a common framework that allows data to be shared and reused across application, enterprise, and community boundaries.⁂ - Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler, and Ora Lassila. The semantic web. Scienti﭂c American, May 2001.
- Do we trust:
  - metadata
  - data
  - mechanism by which data is returned
  - person requesting data?
- Many definitions of trust.
- Jennifer Golbeck's trust onotology to go with FOAF (Jennifer Golbeck, Bijan Parsia, and James Hendler. Trust networks on the semantic web. In Proceedings of Cooperative Intelligent Agents 2003, 2003.): ratings of 1 - 9 for trust of associates. Extended for FicNet (this paper)
- Here, trust: "the expectations that arise that an individual will not act in a way that is detrimental to another individual or community."
  - I might need to expand that for my stuff... maybe... maybe this will do.

Case study

Community predates the Internet. (duh)
Necessary to get opinions from people outside of the amateur writing community, because it is broad. Such as parents/guardians of members.
Questionnaire
- General information
- Reading habits
- Community involvement
- Access and distribution of materials
Questionnaire distributed by:
- requests to archives to pass on to members
- LiveJournal
- emails to specific interested parties
- mailing lists / bulletin boards of relevant special interest groups.
In two weeks, 1116 responses, from 30 countries.
Used to inform ontology design for FicNet, and OntoMedia.

Fan Online Persona (FOP)

Extension of FOAF, tailored for needs of online readers and writers.
foaf:person -> fop:persona
Separates environments for on and offline
fop:NomDe - context for name
Illusion of anonymity is fundamental to fanfic community (who are a large part of online amateur writers)
Most authors have one or more pseudonyms.
80% said email address is the most personal information they should be asked for. ('of the 80%, 15% said no personal information should be requested from anyone - does this make sense? Do they mean other than email address? but that's the 80... If they're in the 80, they can't be part of that 15...)
Privacy is the main thing holding back FOAF (Joseph Smarr. Technical and privacy challenges for integrating foaf into existing applications. Presented at 1st Workshop on Friend of a Friend, Social Networking and the Semantic Web, September 2004.)
Personas aren't meaningless, because people become very attached to them, and only create new ones for specific reasons (says who? No citation..)
Expands foaf:document and foaf:groups
Creation, exchange and review of works is the point of these communities.
FOP dismisses FOAF info like work and school as irrelevant or potentially dangerous.
- [Me] I think the on/offline divide won't be so extreme for many amateur film makers (another story for consumers) because often their faces are in their movies... Also anecdotal evidence from my own experiences that I'm open to having proven to be a minority. Actors vs characters is an interesting distinction too. One amateur film maker can have many personas, even across one channel of output.
Options for FOP determined through long term study of metadata commonly attached to works. (Something I can do, too).

Trust

FilmTrust by Golbeck (just joined, it was closed last time I looked).
- Could be prettier... but 2169 members!
- Visualisations of the network - I need to get good at this.
Reader has to trust info from author falls within a certain level of accuracy. In amateur writing, it is more acceptable to be over cautious than lenient. Differing standards of acceptable content.
- Less trust is lost if a story is underrated than overrated (resulting in disappointment)
- A minority mislabeling work has a big effect on reputation of an archive/community (_HelpingHands community members. A place to pitch in and help - a website _creation resource and project. LiveJournal Community, 2005.)
Writer has to trust reader to make the right decision.
FicNet has a more specialised trust system than Golbeck's.
- Largest contention in this field is adult material and younger readers (debated because this contrasts with IRL - no restricted areas in book stores, or suitability rating scheme for books).
- Initially focussed on age.
- Personas could vouch for each other. Creating fake personae to validate another wasn't worth payoff? Non malicious statements of distrust?
- How to integrate trust and distrust webs? Future
Ontologies developed, ready to be used by applications!
- Ontologies will be continually refined.
- Now designing applications.
  - Using info already gathered via quesitonnaire, re: UI, functionality.
Integrate with OntoMedia to describe works, and link works with people.

=> How did they get to talk to the parents of younger users? Did they ask the members to put them in touch? That doesn't seem like a realistic expectation to have, to me..

🏷 http://vocab.amy.so/blog#Doing http://vocab.amy.so/blog#Doing ficnet foaf fop linked data online communties ontologies ontomedia paper phd provenance semantic web trust

Mon 26th of November 2012 at 9:59pm (Z)

Last modified: Mon 1st of April 2013 at 12:10am (Z)