Re: [foaf-dev] Mapping (tv and radio) programmes to their social media accounts
Dan Brickley <[email protected]> Wed, 30 May 2012 18:12:08 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.rdfweb |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAFfrAFp9=JkBTv+4bg_O=rx5qC0WMV_6rkY6u+cmNTOW5Q3umA@mail.gmail.com> |
On 30 May 2012 17:54, Michael Smethurst <michael.smethurst-IQarjmkfAM9aa/[email protected]> wrote: > Hello! > > I've been planning to publish mappings from BBC programmes to their social > media accounts on Facebook / Twitter / etc > > The easiest way would be to use foaf:Agent and foaf:account and say the > foaf:Agent is same as po:Programme > > Can a programme be an agent? Would declaring same as break anything > horribly? Or is there a neater way to do this? Sounds plausible to me. "Agent" is always a slippery notion, and because of that, it can save us sometimes from maybe needlessly rich designs. I'm sure in some contexts you might want to model a programme's associated teams in great detail, but for this case a simple 'account' link sounds fine. Use a real URI e.g. http://twitter.com/foobar here, rather than a bNode. And although we have accountName and accountServiceHomepage (or whatever they're called) imho these days 90% of the value is usually in a simple link. Will you be able to share an aggregate of this data? The BBC site is so big that even though it has had all this great RDF for years, most of us out here don't have access to it in aggregate form. Having a list of these programme-related Twitter URLs gives a nice way of characterising other (less famous) users in terms of the celebs they (and their friends) follow or talk to - eg. for personalisation. You can get some of it from Wikipedia or other sources but last time I looked, Wikipedia advised against adding Twitter URLs. Definitely some risk of creepyness though! cheers, Dan