Re: [Tracker] Zeitgeist ontology and Tracker



Hi,

 The big difference between that original NEO (Nepomuk Event Ontology)
and the zeitgeist proposal is how to represent an instance of an
event.

 In NEO we propose:
<x> a neo:Event ;
   neo:hasManifestation <neo:pre-defined-manifestation-access>
   neo:hasInterpretation <neo:pre-defined-interpretation-user-activity>
   neo:hasActor <urn:software:123123123>   # This being a neo:software

 What ZG is proposing is more in the line of:
<x> a neo:Event, neo:AccessEvent, neo:UserActivity
    neo:hasActor <blabla>

 [They do it "overriding" rdf:type property, but at the end is
translated into this]

The first option is consistent with our use of the ontology everywhere
else, and Interpretations and Manifestations don't have specific
properties, so there is no need of a class for them. It is also closer
to the Zeitgeist model, which is a good hint that it goes in the right
direction.

I think Mikkael overall agrees on this, but then comes the problem of
API/ABI in zeitgeist. IIRC they are exposing the event
manifestations/interpretations via #defines (which is ok to update)
but some applications are using directly DBus... so we are not
completely free there. We should take a look into this more carefully
and hopefully we can make a smooth transition. This is a ZG-tracker
combined effort.

Regards,

Ivan



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]