Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Look at making the app namespace be a subclass of DOAP #11

Open
deiu opened this issue Jan 26, 2016 · 5 comments
Open

Look at making the app namespace be a subclass of DOAP #11

deiu opened this issue Jan 26, 2016 · 5 comments

Comments

@deiu
Copy link
Contributor

deiu commented Jan 26, 2016

There are currently terms in the solid-app vocab can do not need to be defined there and can be reused from existing vocabs.

@dmitrizagidulin
Copy link
Member

Do we even use the solid-app vocab for anything?

@elf-pavlik
Copy link
Member

How one makes distinction between app as general code base and particular deployment of that app?

Similar case in GoodRelations

Same applies to Solid servers - 'powered by' particular codebase eg. ldnode but deployed somewhere by someone and offered as service.

In a way relevant to issue deploying apps to personal storage

I would also like to attribute the app (as model / code base) in data it generates using as:generator

@csarven
Copy link
Member

csarven commented Aug 18, 2017

First, I agree that there majority of the terms in this vocab can be reused from other vocabs. Second, this vocab was mostly experimental.. I don't think it is used in a way that's critical. Third, a single ns for solid stuff would suffice.

I suggest to drop this vocab altogether and all new terms should go into solid/terms ns.

@timbl @melvincarvalho , everyone, what do you think? Are you using anything here (https://github.com/solid/vocab/blob/master/solid-app.ttl) that's critical in your apps? If so, would you object to moving them to https://github.com/solid/vocab/blob/master/solid-terms.ttl - with preference to excluding anything that can be reused from other vocabs?

@csarven
Copy link
Member

csarven commented Aug 18, 2017

Also a reminder that in addition to having this repository for the Solid vocabs, one of the other reasons was to explore what's used and needed for the Solid-universe.

@csarven
Copy link
Member

csarven commented Aug 18, 2017

See also https://github.com/solid/vocab/pull/18/files which drops the obvious candidates: description, name, icon, homepage.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants