I don’t know enough about rdf to come with something here either, but was searching for alternatives that can potentially model this or at the very least bring new ideas/perspectives. And have found AgRelOn, an Agent Relationship Ontology and the Agreements ontology . They are tangent as their usage domain is fairly different of ours.
I was unable to find a LOV that models this directed collaboration/knowledge relationship/agreement between actors/agents.
@lynnfoster and @aschrijver: I don’t really like AgentRelationshipRole
requires an ID… I was playing in JSON-LD Playground and came up with this:
{
"@context": {
"@vocab": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
"vf": "https://w3id.org/valueflows#"
},
"summary": "!hackers@social.undefinedhackers.net links to !lug@gnusocial.net",
"id": "https://social.undefinedhackers.net/group/hackers/relationships/123",
"type": "Relationship",
"subject": "https://social.undefinedhackers.net/group/hackers",
"relationship": "vf:AgentRelationshipRole",
"object": "https://gnusocial.net/group/lug",
"context": {
"vf:roleLabel": "has a link to",
"vf:inverseRoleLabel": "has a link from"
}
}
The id of this AgentRelationshipRole
would thus expressed by the Relationship Activity’s id… Would this work instead or is it too much of a stretch?
Experimenting with that:
{
"@context": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
"id": "https://social.undefinedhackers.net/activity/1337",
"summary": "!hackers@social.undefinedhackers.net offered to link to !lug@gnusocial.net",
"type": "Offer",
"actor": "https://social.undefinedhackers.net/group/hackers",
"object": "https://social.undefinedhackers.net/group/hackers/relationships/123",
"target": "https://gnusocial.net/group/lug/relationships"
}