3 messages in com.googlegroups.social-graph-apiRe: Custom relationship support?| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Danny Ayers | 02 Feb 2008 11:25 | |
| Brad Fitzpatrick | 02 Feb 2008 11:57 | |
| Danny Ayers | 02 Feb 2008 15:01 |
| Subject: | Re: Custom relationship support? |
|---|---|
| From: | Danny Ayers (dann...@gmail.com) |
| Date: | 02/02/2008 03:01:59 PM |
| List: | com.googlegroups.social-graph-api |
On 02/02/2008, Brad Fitzpatrick <brad...@google.com> wrote:
Danny,
I'm not against supporting any RDF triple's verb as the edge type, and also not against seeing any URL being a node.
Good-o!
If this gets added in the future,
only XFN edge types would be returned by default (including RDF verbs mappable to XFN cleanly)
I'm pretty sure all XFN relationships are cleanly mappable onto RDF. The basic pattern (the person that created this doc has some relationship with the person that created that doc) should apply for all current terms and whatever may appear in the future. More significantly, XFN is used as a HTML meta data profile and the terms are associated with a URI - a HTTP URI no less, so we're talking more than arbitrary strings, an agent can follow its nose with HTTP and find out more about the terms. Check: http://www.w3.org/2003/g/td/xfn-workalike
, but there could be another parameter letting you
change the filter (or lack of filter) of edge types that's returned.
Right...returned or indexed? I'm finding it really hard to get a handle on what's going on under the hood...
So in summary: expanding RDF support would definitely be interesting. :-)
I'm pretty confident of that :-)
Thanks Brad. Keep up the good work.
Cheers, Danny.
--