Re: [Tracker] trackerbird fixes

[Michael Lipp <mnl mnl de>]

Hello Martyn,

Am 10.02.2014 11:55, schrieb Martyn Russell:
> What exactly did you want to achieve and what problems are you seeing
> with the current specification?
>
> My comment was just agreeing with Adrien in staying that technically,
> the ontology is not incorrect because of the subclassing that goes on,
> specifically:
>
>   nmo:Email is a nmo:Message
>   nmo:Message is a nfo:TextDocument
>   nfo:TextDocument is a nfo:Document
>
> The best way to fix this is to eliminate any subclasses in the query
> in tracker-needle because technically, the spec seems right to me.
>
> The other approach would be to disconnect nmo:Message from
> nfo:TextDocument which I don't think is the better alternative.

I think it depends on how close the tracker project wants to follow the
specification (or how far it wants to deviate from them).

I may be completely wrong and maybe http://www.semanticdesktop.org/
isn't the "standards body" for this stuff. But trying to understand
things better, I came across their site. And looking at
http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/2007/03/22/nmo/#Message I
found that they do NOT consider nmo:Message to be a nfo:TextDocument.
Rather, if you look at
http://www.semanticdesktop.org/ontologies/2007/01/19/nie/#InformationElement
you find nmo:Message and nfo:TextDocument to be equal subclasses of
InformationElement. So the two are siblings, but (at least according to
that specification) nmo:Message is NOT a nfo:TextDocument.

As I said, maybe it is me not knowing enough about the Tracker project,
and the project doesn't adhere to those specifications. In that case I
wonder which ones are relevant for the project or whether the project
has designed its own relationships. In the later case, just to put my
two cents in, I think the specification is right. Technically, almost
everything in computing can be considered -- or at least converted to --
a text document, of course. But if I send someone a plan email, and ask
the next day "did you get the document that I mailed you?" then I
suppose at least nine out of ten people will answer "no, there was not
attachment".

 - Michael