As the news item says, "The Profiles Ontology is an RDF vocabulary to describe profiles of (one or more) standards for information resources" and "Content Negotiation by Profile describes how Internet clients may negotiate for content provided by servers according to profiles." There are still open issues in both drafts. The first is relativly simple and straightforward, while the second addresses what is an inherently difficult and complex problem. I personally am not sure whether it's worth the effort, but then again I'm a bit of an ontology sceptic to begin with. My preference is to define fields and thn let people use them as they wish, allowing convention rather than specification define their meaning and ngotiation.
Today: 0 Total: 1092 [Direct link] [Share]
