Re: [foaf-dev] Fwd: Re: [pedantic-web] Pedantic Web Challenge 2011 [Winner = Antoine Zimmermann]

On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 16:36 +0000, Toby Inkster wrote:
> Richar Cyganiak wrote:
> > First, identi.ca doesn't seem to discourage organizations to have 
> > accounts, but foaf:knows assumes that it would only be persons.
> > 
> > Second, following someone on identi.ca does not imply “reciprocated 
> > interaction” -- there are probably users that are followed by
> > thousands of other users, and it's very unlikely they have interacted
> > with all of them! 
> 
> The first point is fair criticism. 
> 
> The second, however, seems to be based on an incorrect assumption that
> if one identi.ca user subscribes to another, identi.ca automatically
> publishes a triple stating that the users foaf:knows each other.
> 
> But that's not the case. The foaf:knows triple is only added if *both*
> users are subscribed to each other. This does imply “reciprocated
> interaction” (or at least it does in my view). If you take a look at,
> say, http://identi.ca/tobyink/foaf, you'll see the triple:
> 
> </user/36737#acct> sioc:follows </user/39252#acct> .
> 
> But nowhere will you find:
> 
> </user/36737> foaf:knows </user/39252> .

Let me throw this up in the air:

Unless we acknowledge the act of subscribing/following an interaction,
foaf:knows is not necessarily valid there. There is a (temporary)
assumption here: either the two parties have interacted previously or
they are about to (in which case putting foaf:knows beforehand is not a
big deal). Therefore, for statements with foaf:knows to be completely
trustable, where they are generated by a script, it would have to be
reasoned from elsewhere e.g., see if two parties have replied to one
another.

-Sarven

_______________________________________________
foaf-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev