Copyright © 2000-2010 Dan Brickley and Libby Miller
  
   
 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
  Attribution License. This copyright applies to the FOAF
  Vocabulary Specification and accompanying documentation in RDF.
 Regarding underlying technology, FOAF uses W3C's RDF technology, an
  open Web standard that can be freely used by anyone.
This specification describes the FOAF language, defined as a dictionary of named properties and classes using W3C's RDF technology.
FOAF has been evolving gradually since its creation in mid-2000. There is now a stable core of classes and properties that will not be changed, beyond modest adjustments to their documentation to track implementation feedback and emerging best practices. New terms may be added at any time (as with a natural-language dictionary), and consequently this specification is an evolving work. The FOAF RDF namespace, by contrast, is fixed and its identifier is not expected to change. Furthermore, efforts are underway to ensure the long-term preservation of the FOAF namespace, its xmlns.com domain name and associated documentation.
This document is created by combining the RDFS/OWL machine-readable FOAF ontology with a set of per-term documents. Future versions may incorporate multilingual translations of the term definitions. The RDF version of the specification is also embedded in the HTML of this document, or available directly from the namespace URI by content negotiation.
The FOAF specification is produced as part of the FOAF project, to provide authoritative documentation of the contents, status and purpose of the RDF/XML vocabulary and document formats known informally as 'FOAF'.
The authors welcome comments on this document, preferably via the public FOAF developers list foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org; public archives are available. A historical backlog of known technical issues is acknowledged, and available for discussion in the FOAF wiki. Proposals for resolving these issues are welcomed, either on foaf-dev or via the wiki. Further work is also needed on the explanatory text in this specification and on the FOAF website; progress towards this will be measured in the version number of future revisions to the FOAF specification.
This revision of the specification includes the following changes:
foaf:givenName and foaf:familyName have been changed from foaf:givenname and foaf:family_name to make FOAF in line with usage of these terms in the Portable Contacts forma. The previous versions remain in the document, marked as 'archaic'.foaf:fundedBy and foaf:themefoaf:holdsAccount has been marked as 'archaic' in favour of foaf:accountIn addition, this revision of the specification validates according to the RDFa DTD, as the RDF/XML has been removed from the HTML following discussion on the mailing slist.
As usual, see the changes section for details of the changes in this version of the specification.
An a-z index of FOAF terms, by class (categories or types) and by property.
Classes: | Agent | Document | Group | Image | LabelProperty | OnlineAccount | OnlineChatAccount | OnlineEcommerceAccount | OnlineGamingAccount | Organization | Person | PersonalProfileDocument | Project |
Properties: | account | accountName | accountServiceHomepage | age | aimChatID | based_near | birthday | currentProject | depiction | depicts | dnaChecksum | familyName | family_name | firstName | fundedBy | geekcode | gender | givenName | givenname | holdsAccount | homepage | icqChatID | img | interest | isPrimaryTopicOf | jabberID | knows | lastName | logo | made | maker | mbox | mbox_sha1sum | member | membershipClass | msnChatID | myersBriggs | name | nick | openid | page | pastProject | phone | plan | primaryTopic | publications | schoolHomepage | sha1 | skypeID | status | surname | theme | thumbnail | tipjar | title | topic | topic_interest | weblog | workInfoHomepage | workplaceHomepage | yahooChatID |
FOAF terms, grouped in broad categories.
Here is a very basic document describing a person:
<foaf:Person rdf:about="#danbri" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"> <foaf:name>Dan Brickley</foaf:name> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://danbri.org/" /> <foaf:openid rdf:resource="http://danbri.org/" /> <foaf:img rdf:resource="/images/me.jpg" /> </foaf:Person>
This brief example introduces the basics of FOAF. It basically says, "there is a foaf:Person with a foaf:name property of 'Dan Brickley'; this person stands in foaf:homepage and foaf:openid relationship to a thing called http://danbri.org/ and a foaf:img relationship to a thing referenced by a relative URI of /images/me.jpg
To a computer, the Web is a flat, boring world, devoid of meaning. This is a pity, as in fact documents on the Web describe real objects and imaginary concepts, and give particular relationships between them. For example, a document might describe a person. The title document to a house describes a house and also the ownership relation with a person. Adding semantics to the Web involves two things: allowing documents which have information in machine-readable forms, and allowing links to be created with relationship values. Only when we have this extra level of semantics will we be able to use computer power to help us exploit the information to a greater extent than our own reading. - Tim Berners-Lee "W3 future directions" keynote, 1st World Wide Web Conference Geneva, May 1994
FOAF, like the Web itself, is a linked information system. It is built using decentralised Semantic Web technology, and has been designed to allow for integration of data across a variety of applications, Web sites and services, and software systems. To achieve this, FOAF takes a liberal approach to data exchange. It does not require you to say anything at all about yourself or others, nor does it place any limits on the things you can say or the variety of Semantic Web vocabularies you may use in doing so. This current specification provides a basic "dictionary" of terms for talking about people and the things they make and do.
FOAF was designed to be used alongside other such dictionaries ("schemas" or "ontologies"), and to be usable with the wide variety of generic tools and services that have been created for the Semantic Web. For example, the W3C work on SPARQL provides us with a rich query language for consulting databases of FOAF data, while the SKOS initiative explores in more detail than FOAF the problem of describing topics, categories, "folksonomies" and subject hierarchies. Meanwhile, other W3C groups are working on improved mechanisms for encoding all kinds of RDF data (including but not limited to FOAF) within Web pages: see the work of the GRDDL and RDFa efforts for more detail. The Semantic Web provides us with an architecture for collaboration, allowing complex technical challenges to be shared by a loosely-coordinated community of developers.
The FOAF project is based around the use of machine readable Web homepages for people, groups, companies and other kinds of thing. To achieve this we use the "FOAF vocabulary" to provide a collection of basic terms that can be used in these Web pages. At the heart of the FOAF project is a set of definitions designed to serve as a dictionary of terms that can be used to express claims about the world. The initial focus of FOAF has been on the description of people, since people are the things that link together most of the other kinds of things we describe in the Web: they make documents, attend meetings, are depicted in photos, and so on.
The FOAF Vocabulary definitions presented here are written using a computer language (RDF/OWL) that makes it easy for software to process some basic facts about the terms in the FOAF vocabulary, and consequently about the things described in FOAF documents. A FOAF document, unlike a traditional Web page, can be combined with other FOAF documents to create a unified database of information. FOAF is a Linked Data system, in that it based around the idea of linking together a Web of decentralised descriptions.
The basic idea is pretty simple. If people publish information in the FOAF document format, machines will be able to make use of that information. If those files contain "see also" references to other such documents in the Web, we will have a machine-friendly version of today's hypertext Web. Computer programs will be able to scutter around a Web of documents designed for machines rather than humans, storing the information they find, keeping a list of "see also" pointers to other documents, checking digital signatures (for the security minded) and building Web pages and question-answering services based on the harvested documents.
So, what is the 'FOAF document format'? FOAF files are just
  text documents (well, Unicode documents). They adopt the conventions 
  of the Resource Description Framework (RDF), and may be written in XML 
  syntax or any other of the syntaxes of RDF such as RDFa or N3. 
  In addition, the FOAF vocabulary defines some
  useful constructs that can appear in FOAF files, alongside other
  RDF vocabularies defined elsewhere. For example, FOAF defines
  categories ('classes') such as foaf:Person,
  foaf:Document, foaf:Image, alongside
  some handy properties of those things, such as
  foaf:name, foaf:mbox (ie. an internet
  mailbox), foaf:homepage etc., as well as some useful
  kinds of relationship that hold between members of these
  categories. For example, one interesting relationship type is
  foaf:depiction. This relates something (eg. a
  foaf:Person) to a foaf:Image. The FOAF
  demos that feature photos and listings of 'who is in which
  picture' are based on software tools that parse RDF documents and
  make use of these properties.
The specific contents of the FOAF vocabulary are detailed in this FOAF namespace document. In addition to the FOAF vocabulary, one of the most interesting features of a FOAF file is that it can contain "see Also" pointers to other FOAF files. This provides a basis for automatic harvesting tools to traverse a Web of interlinked files, and learn about new people, documents, services, data...
The remainder of this specification describes how to publish and interpret descriptions such as these on the Web, using RDF/XML for syntax (file format) and terms from FOAF. It introduces a number of categories (RDF classes such as 'Person') and properties (relationship and attribute types such as 'mbox' or 'workplaceHomepage'). Each term definition is provided in both human and machine-readable form, hyperlinked for quick reference.
For a good general introduction to FOAF, see Edd Dumbill's article, XML Watch: Finding friends with XML and RDF (June 2002, IBM developerWorks). Information about the use of FOAF with image metadata is also available.
The co-depiction experiment shows a fun use of the vocabulary. Jim Ley's SVG image annotation tool show the use of FOAF with detailed image metadata, and provide tools for labelling image regions within a Web browser. To create a FOAF document, you can use Leigh Dodd's FOAF-a-matic javascript tool. For more information on FOAF and related projects, see the FOAF project home page.
FOAF is a collaborative effort amongst Semantic Web developers on the FOAF (foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org) mailing list. The name 'FOAF' is derived from traditional internet usage, an acronym for 'Friend of a Friend'.
The name was chosen to reflect our concern with social networks and the Web, urban myths, trust and connections. Other uses of the name continue, notably in the documentation and investigation of Urban Legends (eg. see the alt.folklore.urban archive or snopes.com), and other FOAF stories. Our use of the name 'FOAF' for a Web vocabulary and document format is intended to complement, rather than replace, these prior uses. FOAF documents describe the characteristics and relationships amongst friends of friends, and their friends, and the stories they tell.
It is important to understand that the FOAF vocabulary as specified in this document is not a standard in the sense of ISO Standardisation, or that associated with W3C Process.
FOAF depends heavily on W3C's standards work, specifically on XML, XML Namespaces, RDF, and OWL. All FOAF documents must be well-formed RDF documents. The FOAF vocabulary, by contrast, is managed more in the style of an Open Source or Free Software project than as an industry standardarisation effort (eg. see Jabber JEPs).
This specification contributes a vocabulary, "FOAF", to the Semantic Web, specifying it using W3C's Resource Description Framework (RDF). As such, FOAF adopts by reference both syntaxes (using XML, N3, or RDFa) a data model (RDF graphs) and a mathematically grounded definition for the rules that underpin the FOAF design.
This specification serves as the FOAF "namespace document". As such it describes the FOAF vocabulary and the terms (RDF classes and properties) that constitute it, so that Semantic Web applications can use those terms in a variety of RDF-compatible document formats and applications.
This document presents FOAF as a Semantic Web vocabulary or Ontology. The FOAF vocabulary is pretty simple, pragmatic and designed to allow simultaneous deployment and extension. FOAF is intended for widescale use, but its authors make no commitments regarding its suitability for any particular purpose.
The FOAF vocabulary is identified by the namespace URI
  'http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/'. Revisions and
  extensions of FOAF are conducted through edits to this document,
  which by convention is accessible in the Web via the namespace URI.
  For practical and deployment reasons, note that we do not 
  update the namespace URI as the vocabulary matures.
  
The core of FOAF now is considered stable. Each release of this specification document has an incrementally increased version number, even while the technical namespace ID remains fixed and includes the original value of "0.1". It long ago became impractical to update the namespace URI without causing huge disruption to both producers and consumers of FOAF data. We are therefore left with the digits "0.1" in our URI. This stands as a warning to all those who might embed metadata in their vocabulary identifiers.
The evolution of FOAF is best considered in terms of the stability of individual vocabulary terms, rather than the specification as a whole. As terms stabilise in usage and documentation, they progress through the categories 'unstable', 'testing' and 'stable'. Older terms are marked 'archaic' which allows the possibility of older forms to become modern again.
The properties and types defined here provide some basic useful concepts for use in FOAF descriptions. Other vocabulary (eg. the Dublin Core metadata elements for simple bibliographic description), RSS 1.0 etc can also be mixed in with FOAF terms, as can local extensions. FOAF is designed to be extended. The FoafVocab page in the FOAF wiki lists a number of extension vocabularies that are particularly applicable to use with FOAF.
If you publish a FOAF self-description (eg. using foaf-a-matic)
  you can make it easier for tools to find your FOAF by putting
  markup in the head of your HTML homepage. It doesn't
  really matter what filename you choose for your FOAF document,
  although foaf.rdf is a common choice. The linking
  markup is as follows:
  <link rel="meta" type="application/rdf+xml" title="FOAF"
               href="http://example.com/~you/foaf.rdf"/>
  ...although of course change the URL to point to your own FOAF document. See also: more on FOAF autodiscovery and services that make use of it.
Why does FOAF use RDF?
FOAF is an application of the Resource Description Framework (RDF) because the subject area we're describing -- people -- has so many competing requirements that a standalone format could not do them all justice. By using RDF, FOAF gains a powerful extensibility mechanism, allowing FOAF-based descriptions can be mixed with claims made in any other RDF vocabulary.
People are the things that link together most of the other kinds of things we describe in the Web: they make documents, attend meetings, are depicted in photos, and so on. Consequently, there are many many things that we might want to say about people, not to mention these related objects (ie. documents, photos, meetings etc).
FOAF as a vocabulary cannot incorporate everything we might want to talk about that is related to people, or it would be as large as a full dictionary. Instead of covering all topics within FOAF itself, we use a larger framework - W3C's RDF - that allows us to take advantage of work elsewhere on more specific descriptive vocabularies (eg. for geographical / mapping data).
RDF provides FOAF with a way to mix together different descriptive vocabularies in a consistent way. Vocabularies can be created by different communites and groups as appropriate and mixed together as required, without needing any centralised agreement on how terms from different vocabularies can be written down in XML.
This mixing happens in two ways: firstly, RDF provides an
  underlying model of (typed) objects and their attributes or
  relationships. foaf:Person is an example of a type
  of thing (a "class"), while foaf:knows and
  foaf:name are examples of a relationship and an
  attribute of an foaf:Person; in RDF we call these
  "properties". Any vocabulary described in RDF shares
  this basic model, which is discernable in the syntax for RDF, and
  which removes one level of confusion in understanding a
  given vocabulary, making it simpler to comprehend and therefore
  reuse a vocabulary that you have not written yourself. This is
  the minimal self-documentation that RDF gives you.
Secondly, there are mechanisms for saying which RDF properties
  are connected to which classes, and how different classes are
  related to each other, using RDF and OWL. This is another form of
  self-documentation, which allows you to connect different RDF
  vocabularies quite freely. An example of this is given
  below where the foaf:based_near property has a
  domain and range (types of class at each end of the property)
  from a different namespace altogether.
In summary then, RDF is self-documenting in ways which enable the creation and combination of vocabularies in a decentralised manner. This is particularly important for a vocabulary which describes people, since people connect to many other domains of interest and activity, and a single project cannot possibly cover everything.
FOAF introduces the following classes and properties. There is a link at the top of this document to the RDF/XML version.
Classes: | Agent | Document | Group | Image | LabelProperty | OnlineAccount | OnlineChatAccount | OnlineEcommerceAccount | OnlineGamingAccount | Organization | Person | PersonalProfileDocument | Project |
Properties: | account | accountName | accountServiceHomepage | age | aimChatID | based_near | birthday | currentProject | depiction | depicts | dnaChecksum | familyName | family_name | firstName | fundedBy | geekcode | gender | givenName | givenname | holdsAccount | homepage | icqChatID | img | interest | isPrimaryTopicOf | jabberID | knows | lastName | logo | made | maker | mbox | mbox_sha1sum | member | membershipClass | msnChatID | myersBriggs | name | nick | openid | page | pastProject | phone | plan | primaryTopic | publications | schoolHomepage | sha1 | skypeID | status | surname | theme | thumbnail | tipjar | title | topic | topic_interest | weblog | workInfoHomepage | workplaceHomepage | yahooChatID |
| Status: | stable | 
|---|---|
| Properties include: | weblog gender holdsAccount birthday age made skypeID msnChatID icqChatID mbox status mbox_sha1sum account yahooChatID aimChatID jabberID openid tipjar | 
| Used with: | member maker | 
| has subclass | Group Person Organization | 
| Disjoint With: | Document | 
The Agent class is the class of agents; things that do stuff. A well 
known sub-class is Person, representing people. Other kinds of agents 
include Organization and Group.
The Agent class is useful in a few places in FOAF where 
Person would have been overly specific. For example, the IM chat ID 
properties such as jabberID are typically associated with people, but 
sometimes belong to software bots.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | 
|---|---|
| Properties include: | member | 
| subClassOf | Agent | 
The Group class represents a collection of individual agents (and may 
itself play the role of a Agent, ie. something that can perform actions).
This concept is intentionally quite broad, covering informal and 
ad-hoc groups, long-lived communities, organizational groups within a workplace, etc. Some 
such groups may have associated characteristics which could be captured in RDF (perhaps a 
homepage, name, mailing list etc.).
While a Group has the characteristics of a Agent, it 
is also associated with a number of other Agents (typically people) who 
constitute the Group. FOAF provides a mechanism, the 
membershipClass property, which relates a Group to a 
sub-class of the class Agent who are members of the group. This is a 
little complicated, but allows us to make group membership rules explicit.
The markup (shown below) for defining a group is both complex and powerful. It 
allows group membership rules to match against any RDF-describable characteristics of the potential 
group members. As FOAF and similar vocabularies become more expressive in their ability to 
describe individuals, the Group mechanism for categorising them into 
groups also becomes more powerful. 
 
While the formal description of membership criteria for a Group may
be complex, the basic mechanism for saying that someone is in a Group is
very simple. We simply use a member property of the
Group to indicate the agents that are members of the group. For example:
<foaf:Group> <foaf:name>ILRT staff</foaf:name> <foaf:member> <foaf:Person> <foaf:name>Martin Poulter</foaf:name> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/aboutus/staff/staffprofile/?search=plmlp"/> <foaf:workplaceHomepage rdf:resource="http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/"/> </foaf:Person> </foaf:member> </foaf:Group>
Behind the scenes, further RDF statements can be used to express the rules for being a member of this group. End-users of FOAF need not pay attention to these details.
Here is an example. We define a Group representing those people who 
are ILRT staff members (ILRT is a department at the University of Bristol). The membershipClass property connects the group (conceived of as a social 
entity and agent in its own right) with the class definition for those people who 
constitute it. In this case, the rule is that all group members are in the 
ILRTStaffPerson class, which is in turn populated by all those things that are a 
Person and which have a workplaceHomepage of 
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/. This is typical: FOAF groups are created by 
specifying a sub-class of Agent (in fact usually this 
will be a sub-class of Person), and giving criteria 
for which things fall in or out of the sub-class. For this, we use the 
owl:onProperty and owl:hasValue properties, 
indicating the property/value pairs which must be true of matching 
agents.
<!-- here we see a FOAF group described.
     each foaf group may be associated with an OWL definition 
     specifying the class of agents that constitute the group's membership -->
<foaf:Group>
 <foaf:name>ILRT staff</foaf:name>
 <foaf:membershipClass>
    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ilrt.example.com/groups#ILRTStaffPerson">
     <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person"/>
     <rdfs:subClassOf>
       <owl:Restriction> 
         <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/workplaceHomepage"/>
         <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/"/>
       </owl:Restriction> 
     </rdfs:subClassOf>
   </owl:Class>
 </foaf:membershipClass>
</foaf:Group>
Note that while these example OWL rules for being in the eg:ILRTStaffPerson class are 
based on a Person having a particular 
workplaceHomepage, this places no obligations on the authors of actual 
FOAF documents to include this information. If the information is included, then 
generic OWL tools may infer that some person is an eg:ILRTStaffPerson. To go the extra 
step and infer that some eg:ILRTStaffPerson is a member of the group 
whose name is "ILRT staff", tools will need some knowledge of the way 
FOAF deals with groups. In other words, generic OWL technology gets us most of the way, 
but the full Group machinery requires extra work for implimentors.
The current design names the relationship as pointing from the group, to the member. This is convenient when writing XML/RDF that encloses the members within markup that describes the group. Alternate representations of the same content are allowed in RDF, so you can write claims about the Person and the Group without having to nest either description inside the other. For (brief) example:
<foaf:Group> <foaf:member rdf:nodeID="martin"/> <!-- more about the group here --> </foaf:Group> <foaf:Person rdf:nodeID="martin"> <!-- more about martin here --> </foaf:Person>
There is a FOAF issue tracker associated with this FOAF term. A design goal is to make the most of W3C's OWL language for representing group-membership criteria, while also making it easy to leverage existing groups and datasets available online (eg. buddylists, mailing list membership lists etc). Feedback on the current design is solicited! Should we consider using SPARQL queries instead, for example?
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | 
|---|---|
| subClassOf | Agent | 
| Disjoint With: | Document Person | 
The Organization class represents a kind of Agent 
corresponding to social instititutions such as companies, societies etc.
This is a more 'solid' class than Group, which allows 
for more ad-hoc collections of individuals. These terms, like the corresponding
natural language concepts, have some overlap, but different emphasis.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | 
|---|---|
| Properties include: | knows schoolHomepage firstName familyName topic_interest currentProject myersBriggs geekcode img plan workInfoHomepage pastProject family_name surname interest publications workplaceHomepage lastName | 
| Used with: | knows | 
| subClassOf | Agent Person Spatial Thing | 
| Disjoint With: | Document Project Organization | 
The Person class represents people. Something is a 
Person if it is a person. We don't nitpic about whether they're 
alive, dead, real, or imaginary. The Person class is a sub-class of the 
Agent class, since all people are considered 'agents' in FOAF. 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Properties include: | sha1 topic primaryTopic | 
| Used with: | workInfoHomepage schoolHomepage accountServiceHomepage page weblog isPrimaryTopicOf interest homepage openid publications workplaceHomepage tipjar | 
| has subclass | PersonalProfileDocument | 
| Disjoint With: | Person Project Organization | 
The Document class represents those things which are, broadly conceived, 
'documents'.
The Image class is a sub-class of Document, since all images 
are documents.
We do not (currently) distinguish precisely between physical and electronic documents, or 
between copies of a work and the abstraction those copies embody. The relationship between 
documents and their byte-stream representation needs clarification (see sha1 
for related issues).
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Properties include: | thumbnail depicts | 
| Used with: | thumbnail depiction img | 
The class Image is a sub-class of Document 
corresponding to those documents which are images.
Digital images (such as JPEG, PNG, GIF bitmaps, SVG diagrams etc.) are examples of 
Image. 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| subClassOf | Document | 
The PersonalProfileDocument class represents those
things that are a Document, and that use RDF to
describe properties of the person who is the maker
of the document. There is just one Person described in
the document, ie.
the person who made it and who will be its
primaryTopic.
The PersonalProfileDocument class, and FOAF's
associated conventions for describing it, captures an important
deployment pattern for the FOAF vocabulary. FOAF is very often used in
public RDF documents made available through the Web. There is a
colloquial notion that these "FOAF files" are often somebody's
FOAF file. Through PersonalProfileDocument we provide
a machine-readable expression of this concept, providing a basis for 
FOAF documents to make claims about their maker and topic.
When describing a PersonalProfileDocument it is
typical (and useful) to describe its associated Person
using the maker property. Anything that is a
Person and that is the maker of some
Document will be the primaryTopic of
that Document. Although this can be inferred, it is
helpful to include this information explicitly within the
PersonalProfileDocument.
For example, here is a fragment of a personal profile document which describes its author explicitly:
<foaf:Person rdf:nodeID="p1"> <foaf:name>Dan Brickley</foaf:name> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://danbri.org/"/> <!-- etc... --> </foaf:Person> <foaf:PersonalProfileDocument rdf:about=""> <foaf:maker rdf:nodeID="p1"/> <foaf:primaryTopic rdf:nodeID="p1"/> </foaf:PersonalProfileDocument>
Note that a PersonalProfileDocument will have some
representation as RDF. Typically this will be in W3C's RDF/XML syntax,
however we leave open the possibility for the use of other notations, or
representational conventions including automated transformations from
HTML (GRDDL spec for
one such technique).
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
A LabelProperty is any RDF property with texual values that serve as labels.
Any property that is a LabelProperty is effectively a sub-property of rdfs:label. This utility
class provides an alternate means of expressing this idea, in a way that may help with OWL 2.0 DL compatibility.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Properties include: | accountName accountServiceHomepage | 
| Used with: | account holdsAccount | 
| subClassOf | A thing | 
| has subclass | Online Gaming Account Online E-commerce Account Online Chat Account | 
The OnlineAccount class represents the provision of some form of online 
service, by some party (indicated indirectly via a accountServiceHomepage) to some Agent. The 
account property of the agent is used to indicate accounts that are associated with the agent.
See OnlineChatAccount for an example. Other sub-classes include OnlineEcommerceAccount and OnlineGamingAccount.
One deployment style for this construct is to use URIs for well-known documents (or other entities) that strongly embody the account-holding relationship; for example, user profile pages on social network sites. This has the advantage of providing URIs that are likely to be easy to link with other information, but means that the instances of this class should not be considered 'accounts' in the abstract or business sense of a 'contract'.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| subClassOf | Online Account | 
A OnlineChatAccount is a OnlineAccount devoted to 
chat / instant messaging. The account may offer other services too; FOAF's 
sub-classes of OnlineAccount are not mutually disjoint.
This is a generalization of the FOAF Chat ID properties, 
jabberID, aimChatID, 
skypeID, msnChatID, icqChatID and 
yahooChatID. 
Unlike those simple properties, OnlineAccount and associated FOAF terms 
allows us to describe a great variety of online accounts, without having to anticipate 
them in the FOAF vocabulary.
For example, here is a description of an IRC chat account, specific to the Freenode IRC network:
<foaf:Person>
  <foaf:name>Dan Brickley</foaf:name>
  <foaf:account>
    <foaf:OnlineAccount>
      <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/OnlineChatAccount"/>
      <foaf:accountServiceHomepage 
               rdf:resource="http://www.freenode.net/"/>
      <foaf:accountName>danbri</foaf:accountName>
    </foaf:OnlineAccount>
  </foaf:account>
</foaf:Person>
Note that it may be impolite to carelessly reveal someone else's chat identifier (which 
might also serve as an indicate of email address) As with email,  there are privacy and 
anti-SPAM considerations. FOAF does not currently provide a way to  represent an 
obfuscated chat ID (ie. there is no parallel to the mbox / 
mbox_sha1sum mapping). 
In addition to the generic OnlineAccount and 
OnlineChatAccount mechanisms, 
FOAF also provides several convenience chat ID properties 
(jabberID, aimChatID, icqChatID, 
msnChatID,yahooChatID, skypeID). 
These serve as as a shorthand for some common cases; their use may not always be 
appropriate.
We should specify some mappings between the abbreviated and full representations of 
Jabber, AIM, MSN, ICQ, Yahoo! and MSN chat 
accounts. This has been done for skypeID. This requires us to 
identify an appropriate accountServiceHomepage for each. If we 
wanted to make the OnlineAccount mechanism even more generic, we could 
invent a relationship that holds between a OnlineAccount instance and a 
convenience property. To continue the example above, we could describe how Freenode could define a property 'fn:freenodeChatID' 
corresponding to Freenode online accounts.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| subClassOf | Online Account | 
A OnlineEcommerceAccount is a OnlineAccount devoted to 
buying and/or selling of goods, services etc. Examples include Amazon, eBay, PayPal, thinkgeek, etc.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| subClassOf | Online Account | 
A OnlineGamingAccount is a OnlineAccount devoted to 
online gaming.
Examples might include EverQuest, Xbox live, Neverwinter Nights, etc., as well as older text-based systems (MOOs, MUDs and suchlike).
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Disjoint With: | Document Person | 
The Project class represents the class of things that are 'projects'. These 
may be formal or informal, collective or individual. It is often useful to indicate the 
homepage of a Project.
Further work is needed to specify the connections between this class and the FOAF properties 
currentProject and pastProject.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | |
| Range: | Document | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The homepage property relates something to a homepage about it.
Many kinds of things have homepages. FOAF allows a thing to have multiple homepages, but 
constrains homepage so that there can be only one thing that has any 
particular homepage.
A 'homepage' in this sense is a public Web document, typically but not necessarily 
available in HTML format. The page has as a topic the thing whose 
homepage it is. The homepage is usually controlled, edited or published by the thing whose 
homepage it is; as such one might look to a homepage for information on its owner from its 
owner. This works for people, companies, organisations etc. 
The homepage property is a sub-property of the more general 
page property for relating a thing to a page about that thing. See also 
topic, the inverse of the page property. 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | 
| Range: | A thing | 
The made property relates a Agent 
to something made by it. As such it is an 
inverse of the maker property, which relates a thing to 
something that made it. See made for more details on the 
relationship between these FOAF terms and related Dublin Core vocabulary.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | 
| Range: | Agent | 
The maker property relates something to a  
Agent that made it. As such it is an 
inverse of the made property.
The name (or other rdfs:label) of the 
maker of something can be described as the 
dc:creator of that thing.
For example, if the thing named by the URI 
http://danbri.org/ has a 
maker that is a Person whose 
name is 'Dan Brickley', we can conclude that 
http://danbri.org/ has a dc:creator of 'Dan 
Brickley'. 
FOAF descriptions are encouraged to use dc:creator only for 
simple textual names, and to use maker to indicate 
creators, rather than risk confusing creators with their names. This 
follows most Dublin Core usage. See UsingDublinCoreCreator 
for details.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Range: | A thing | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The mbox property is a relationship between the owner of a mailbox and 
a mailbox. These are typically identified using the mailto: URI scheme (see RFC 2368).
Note that there are many mailboxes (eg. shared ones) which are not the 
mbox of anyone. Furthermore, a person can have multiple 
mbox properties. 
In FOAF, we often see mbox used as an indirect way of identifying its 
owner. This works even if the mailbox is itself out of service (eg. 10 years old), since 
the property is defined in terms of its primary owner, and doesn't require the mailbox to 
actually be being used for anything.
Many people are wary of sharing information about their mailbox addresses in public. To 
address such concerns whilst continuing the FOAF convention of indirectly identifying 
people by referring to widely known properties, FOAF also provides the 
mbox_sha1sum mechanism, which is a relationship between a person and 
the value you get from passing a mailbox URI to the SHA1 mathematical function.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | stable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Group | 
| Range: | Agent | 
The member property relates a Group to a 
Agent that is a member of that group.
See Group for details and examples.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The aimChatID property relates a Agent to a textual 
identifier ('screenname') assigned to them in the AOL Instant Messanger (AIM) system. 
See AOL's AIM site for more details of AIM and AIM 
screennames. The iChat tools from Apple also make use of AIM identifiers. 
See OnlineChatAccount (and OnlineAccount) for a
more general (and verbose) mechanism for describing IM and chat accounts.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | A thing | 
A currentProject relates a Person
to a Document indicating some collaborative or
individual undertaking.  This relationship
indicates that the Person has some active role in the
project, such as development, coordination, or support.
When a Person is no longer involved with a project, or
perhaps is inactive for some time, the relationship becomes a
pastProject.
If the Person has stopped working on a project because it
has been completed (successfully or otherwise), pastProject is
applicable. In general, currentProject is used to indicate
someone's current efforts (and implied interests, concerns etc.), while
pastProject describes what they've previously been doing.
Note that this property requires further work. There has been confusion about 
whether it points to a thing (eg. something you've made; a homepage for a project, 
ie. a Document or to instances of the class Project, 
which might themselves have a homepage. In practice, it seems to have been 
used in a similar way to interest, referencing homepages of ongoing projects.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | 
| Range: | Image | 
The depiction property is a relationship between a thing and an 
Image that depicts it. As such it is an inverse of the
depicts relationship. 
A common use of depiction (and depicts) is to indicate 
the contents of a digital image, for example the people or objects represented in an 
online photo gallery. 
Extensions to this basic idea include 'Co-Depiction' (social networks as evidenced in photos), as well as richer photo metadata through the mechanism of using SVG paths to indicate the regions of an image which depict some particular thing. See 'Annotating Images With SVG' for tools and details.
The basic notion of 'depiction' could also be extended to deal with multimedia content (video clips, audio), or refined to deal with corner cases, such as pictures of pictures etc.
The depiction property is a super-property of the more specific property 
img, which is used more sparingly. You stand in a 
depiction relation to any Image that depicts 
you, whereas img is typically used to indicate a few images that are 
particularly representative.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Image | 
| Range: | A thing | 
The depicts property is a relationship between a Image 
and something that the image depicts. As such it is an inverse of the 
depiction relationship. See depiction for further notes.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
The familyName property is provided (alongside givenName) for use when describing parts of people's names. Although these
concepts do not capture the full range of personal naming styles found world-wide, they are commonly used and have some value.
There is also a simple name property.
Support is also provided for the more archaic and culturally varying terminology of firstName and lastName.
See the issue tracker for design discussions, status and ongoing work on rationalising the FOAF naming machinery.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
The firstName property is provided (alongside lastName) as a mechanism to support legacy data that cannot be
easily interpreted in terms of the (otherwise preferred) familyName and givenName properties. The concepts
of 'first' and 'last' names do not work well across cultural and linguistic boundaries; however they are widely used in addressbooks and databases.
See the issue tracker for design discussions, status and ongoing work on rationalising the FOAF naming machinery.
There is also a simple name property.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Functional Property | ||
The gender property relates a Agent (typically a 
Person) to a string representing its gender. In most cases the value 
will be the string 'female' or 'male' (in lowercase without surrounding quotes or spaces). 
Like all FOAF properties, there is in general no requirement to use  
gender in any particular document or description. Values other than 
'male' and 'female' may be used, but are not enumerated here. The gender 
mechanism is not intended to capture the full variety of biological, social and sexual 
concepts associated with the word 'gender'. 
Anything that has a gender property will be some kind of 
Agent. However there are kinds of Agent to 
which the concept of gender isn't applicable (eg. a Group). FOAF does not 
currently include a class corresponding directly to "the type of thing that has a gender".
At any point in time, a Agent has at most one value for 
gender. FOAF does not treat gender as a 
static property; the same individual may have different values for this property 
at different times.
Note that FOAF's notion of gender isn't defined biologically or anatomically - this would 
be tricky since we have a broad notion that applies to all Agents 
(including robots - eg. Bender from Futurama is 'male'). As stressed above, 
FOAF's notion of gender doesn't attempt to encompass the full range of concepts associated 
with human gender, biology and sexuality. As such it is a (perhaps awkward) compromise 
between the clinical and the social/psychological. In general, a person will be the best 
authority on their gender. Feedback on this design is 
particularly welcome (via the FOAF mailing list, 
foaf-dev). We have tried to 
be respectful of diversity without attempting to catalogue or enumerate that diversity. 
This may also be a good point for a periodic reminder: as with all FOAF properties, 
documents that use 'gender' will on occassion be innacurate, misleading 
or outright false. FOAF, like all open means of communication, supports lying.
 Application authors using 
FOAF data should always be cautious in their presentation of unverified information, but be 
particularly sensitive to issues and risks surrounding sex and gender (including privacy 
and personal safety concerns). Designers of FOAF-based user interfaces should be careful to allow users to omit 
gender when describing themselves and others, and to allow at least for 
values other than 'male' and 'female' as options. Users of information 
conveyed via FOAF (as via information conveyed through mobile phone text messages, email, 
Internet chat, HTML pages etc.) should be skeptical of unverified information.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
The givenName property is provided (alongside familyName) for use when describing parts of people's names. Although these
concepts do not capture the full range of personal naming styles found world-wide, they are commonly used and have some value. 
There is also a simple name property.
Support is also provided for the more archaic and culturally varying terminology of firstName and lastName.
See the issue tracker for design discussions, status and ongoing work on rationalising the FOAF naming machinery.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The icqChatID property relates a Agent to a textual 
identifier assigned to them in the ICQ Chat system. 
See the icq chat site for more details of the 'icq' 
service. Their "What is ICQ?" document 
provides a basic overview, while their "About Us page 
notes that ICQ has been acquired by AOL. Despite the relationship with AOL, ICQ is at 
the time of writing maintained as a separate identity from the AIM brand (see 
aimChatID).
See OnlineChatAccount (and OnlineAccount) for a
more general (and verbose) mechanism for describing IM and chat accounts.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | Image | 
The img property relates a Person to a 
Image that represents them. Unlike its super-property 
depiction, we only use img when an image is 
particularly representative of some person. The analogy is with the image(s) that might 
appear on someone's homepage, rather than happen to appear somewhere in their photo album.
Unlike the more general depiction property (and its inverse, 
depicts), the img property is only used with 
representations of people (ie. instances of Person). So you can't use 
it to find pictures of cats, dogs etc. The basic idea is to have a term whose use is more 
restricted than depiction so we can have a useful way of picking out a 
reasonable image to represent someone. FOAF defines img as a 
sub-property of depiction, which means that the latter relationship is 
implied whenever two things are related by the former.
Note that img does not have any restrictions on the dimensions, colour 
depth, format etc of the Image it references. 
Terminology: note that img is a property (ie. relationship), and that 
code:Image is a similarly named class (ie. category, a type of thing). It 
might have been more helpful to call img 'mugshot' or similar; instead 
it is named by analogy to the HTML IMG element.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | Document | 
The interest property represents an interest of a 
Agent, through 
indicating a Document whose topic(s) broadly 
characterises that interest.
For example, we might claim that a person or group has an interest in RDF by saying they
stand in a interest relationship to the RDF home page. Loosly, such RDF would be saying 
"this agent is interested in the topic of this page".
Uses of interest include a variety of filtering and resource discovery 
applications. It could be used, for example, to help find answers to questions such as 
"Find me members of this organisation with an interest in XML who have also contributed to 
CPAN)". 
This approach to characterising interests is intended to compliment other mechanisms (such as the use of controlled vocabulary). It allows us to use a widely known set of unique identifiers (Web page URIs) with minimal pre-coordination. Since URIs have a controlled syntax, this makes data merging much easier than the use of free-text characterisations of interest.
Note that interest does not imply expertise, and that this FOAF term provides no support 
for characterising levels of interest: passing fads and lifelong quests are both examples 
of someone's interest. Describing interests in full is a complex 
undertaking; interest provides one basic component of FOAF's approach to 
these problems.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | |
| Range: | Document | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The isPrimaryTopicOf property relates something to a document that is 
mainly about it.
The isPrimaryTopicOf property is inverse functional: for
any document that is the value of this property, there is at most one thing in the world
that is the primary topic of that document. This is useful, as it allows for data 
merging, as described in the documentation for its inverse, primaryTopic.
page is a super-property of isPrimaryTopicOf. The change 
of terminology between the two property names reflects the utility of 'primaryTopic' and its 
inverse when identifying things. Anything that has an isPrimaryTopicOf relation 
to some document X, also has a page relationship to it.
Note that homepage, is a sub-property of both page and 
isPrimarySubjectOf. The awkwardly named 
isPrimarySubjectOf is less specific, and can be used with any document 
that is primarily about the thing of interest (ie. not just on homepages).
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The jabberID property relates a Agent to a textual 
identifier assigned to them in the Jabber messaging 
system. 
See the Jabber site for more information about the Jabber 
protocols and tools.
Jabber, unlike several other online messaging systems, is based on an open, publically 
documented protocol specification, and has a variety of open source implementations. Jabber IDs 
can be assigned to a variety of kinds of thing, including software 'bots', chat rooms etc. For 
the purposes of FOAF, these are all considered to be kinds of Agent (ie. 
things that do stuff). The uses of Jabber go beyond simple IM chat applications. The 
jabberID property is provided as a basic hook to help support RDF description 
of Jabber users and services.
See OnlineChatAccount (and OnlineAccount) for a
more general (and verbose) mechanism for describing IM and chat accounts.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | Person | 
The knows property relates a Person to another 
Person that he or she knows. 
We take a broad view of 'knows', but do require some form of reciprocated interaction (ie. stalkers need not apply). Since social attitudes and conventions on this topic vary greatly between communities, counties and cultures, it is not appropriate for FOAF to be overly-specific here.
If someone knows a person, it would be usual for 
the relation to be reciprocated. However this doesn't mean that there is any obligation 
for either party to publish FOAF describing this relationship. A knows 
relationship does not imply friendship, endorsement, or that a face-to-face meeting 
has taken place: phone, fax, email, and smoke signals are all perfectly 
acceptable ways of communicating with people you know. 
You probably know hundreds of people, yet might only list a few in your public FOAF file. That's OK. Or you might list them all. It is perfectly fine to have a FOAF file and not list anyone else in it at all. This illustrates the Semantic Web principle of partial description: RDF documents rarely describe the entire picture. There is always more to be said, more information living elsewhere in the Web (or in our heads...).
Since knows is vague by design, it may be suprising that it has uses. 
Typically these involve combining other RDF properties. For example, an application might 
look at properties of each weblog that was made by 
someone you "knows". Or check the newsfeed of the online photo archive 
for each of these people, to show you recent photos taken by people you know.
To provide additional levels of representation beyond mere 'knows', FOAF applications can do several things.
They can use more precise relationships than knows to relate people to 
people. The original FOAF design included two of these ('knowsWell','friend') which we 
removed because they were somewhat awkward to actually use, bringing an 
inappopriate air of precision to an intrinsically vague concept. Other extensions have 
been proposed, including Eric Vitiello's Relationship module for 
FOAF.
In addition to using more specialised inter-personal relationship types 
(eg rel:acquaintanceOf etc) it is often just as good to use RDF descriptions of the states 
of affairs which imply particular kinds of relationship. So for example, two people who 
have the same value for their workplaceHomepage property are 
typically colleagues. We don't (currently) clutter FOAF up with these extra relationships, 
but the facts can be written in FOAF nevertheless. Similarly, if there exists a 
Document that has two people listed as its makers, 
then they are probably collaborators of some kind. Or if two people appear in 100s of 
digital photos together, there's a good chance they're friends and/or colleagues.
So FOAF is quite pluralistic in its approach to representing relationships between people. FOAF is built on top of a general purpose machine language for representing relationships (ie. RDF), so is quite capable of representing any kinds of relationship we care to add. The problems are generally social rather than technical; deciding on appropriate ways of describing these interconnections is a subtle art.
Perhaps the most important use of knows is, alongside the 
rdfs:seeAlso property, to connect FOAF files together. Taken alone, a FOAF 
file is somewhat dull. But linked in with 1000s of other FOAF files it becomes more 
interesting, with each FOAF file saying a little more about people, places, documents, things... 
By mentioning other people (via knows or other relationships), and by 
providing an rdfs:seeAlso link to their FOAF file, you can make it easy for 
FOAF indexing tools ('scutters') to find 
your FOAF and the FOAF of the people you've mentioned. And the FOAF of the people they 
mention, and so on. This makes it possible to build FOAF aggregators without the need for 
a centrally managed directory of FOAF files...
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | 
| Range: | A thing | 
The logo property is used to indicate a graphical logo of some kind. 
It is probably underspecified...
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
A mbox_sha1sum of a Person is a textual representation of 
the result of applying the SHA1 mathematical functional to a 'mailto:' identifier (URI) for an 
Internet mailbox that they stand in a mbox relationship to.
In other words, if you have a mailbox (mbox) but don't want to reveal its 
address, you can take that address and generate a mbox_sha1sum representation 
of it. Just as a mbox can be used as an indirect identifier for its owner, we 
can do the same with mbox_sha1sum since there is only one 
Person with any particular value for that property.
Many FOAF tools use mbox_sha1sum in preference to exposing mailbox 
information. This is usually for privacy and SPAM-avoidance reasons. Other relevant techniques 
include the use of PGP encryption (see Edd Dumbill's 
documentation) and the use of FOAF-based whitelists for 
mail filtering.
Code examples for SHA1 in C#, Java, PHP, Perl and Python can be found in Sam Ruby's 
weblog entry. Remember to include the 'mailto:' prefix, but no trailing 
whitespace, when computing a mbox_sha1sum property.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The msnChatID property relates a Agent to a textual 
identifier assigned to them in the Microsoft online chat system originally known as 'MSN', and now 
Windows Live Messenger.
See the Microsoft mesenger and Windows Live ID sites for more details.
See OnlineChatAccount (and OnlineAccount) for a 
more general (and verbose) mechanism for describing IM and chat accounts. 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
The myersBriggs property represents the Myers Briggs (MBTI) approach to 
personality taxonomy. It is included in FOAF as an example of a property 
that takes certain constrained values, and to give some additional detail to the FOAF 
files of those who choose to include it. The myersBriggs property applies only to the 
Person class; wherever you see it, you can infer it is being applied to 
a person.
The myersBriggs property is interesting in that it illustrates how 
FOAF can serve as a carrier for various kinds of information, without necessarily being 
commited to any associated worldview. Not everyone will find myersBriggs (or star signs, 
or blood types, or the four humours) a useful perspective on human behaviour and 
personality. The inclusion of a Myers Briggs property doesn't indicate that FOAF endorses 
the underlying theory, any more than the existence of weblog is an 
endorsement of soapboxes.
The values for myersBriggs are the following 16 4-letter textual codes: 
ESTJ, INFP, ESFP, INTJ, ESFJ, INTP, ENFP, ISTJ, ESTP, INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ENTJ, ISFP, 
ENTP, ISFJ. If multiple of these properties are applicable, they are represented by 
applying multiple properties to a person.
For further reading on MBTI, see various online sources (eg. this article). There are various online sites which offer quiz-based tools for determining a person's MBTI classification. The owners of the MBTI trademark have probably not approved of these.
This FOAF property suggests some interesting uses, some of which could perhaps be used to test the claims made by proponents of the MBTI (eg. an analysis of weblog postings filtered by MBTI type). However it should be noted that MBTI FOAF descriptions are self-selecting; MBTI categories may not be uniformly appealing to the people they describe. Further, there is probably a degree of cultural specificity implicit in the assumptions made by many questionaire-based MBTI tools; the MBTI system may not make sense in cultural settings beyond those it was created for.
See also Cory Caplinger's summary table or the RDFWeb article, FOAF Myers Briggs addition for further background and examples.
Note: Myers Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI are registered trademarks of Consulting Psychologists Press Inc. Oxford Psycholgists Press Ltd has exclusive rights to the trademark in the UK.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | 
The name of something is a simple textual string.
XML language tagging may be used to indicate the language of the name. For example:
<foaf:name xml:lang="en">Dan Brickley</foaf:name>
FOAF provides some other naming constructs. While foaf:name does not explicitly represent name substructure (family vs given etc.) it does provide a basic level of interoperability. See the issue tracker for status of work on this issue.
The name property, like all RDF properties with a range of rdfs:Literal, may be used with XMLLiteral datatyped 
values (multiple names are acceptable whether they are in the same langauge or not). XMLLiteral usage is not yet widely adopted. Feedback on this aspect of the FOAF design is particularly welcomed.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
The nick property relates a Person to a short (often 
abbreviated) nickname, such as those use in IRC chat, online accounts, and computer 
logins.
This property is necessarily vague, because it does not indicate any particular naming control authority, and so cannot distinguish a person's login from their (possibly various) IRC nicknames or other similar identifiers. However it has some utility, since many people use the same string (or slight variants) across a variety of such environments.
For specific controlled sets of names (relating primarily to Instant Messanger accounts), 
FOAF provides some convenience properties: jabberID, 
aimChatID, msnChatID and 
icqChatID. Beyond this, the problem of representing such accounts is not 
peculiar to Instant Messanging, and it is not scaleable to attempt to enumerate each 
naming database as a distinct FOAF property. The OnlineAccount term (and 
supporting vocabulary) are provided as a more verbose and more expressive generalisation 
of these properties.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | 
| Range: | Document | 
The page property relates a thing to a document about that thing.
As such it is an inverse of the topic property, which relates a document 
to a thing that the document is about.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | A thing | 
After a Person is no longer involved with a
currentProject, or has been inactive for some time, a
pastProject relationship can be used. This indicates that
the Person was involved with the described project at one
point. 
If the Person has stopped working on a project because it 
has been completed (successfully or otherwise), pastProject is 
applicable. In general, currentProject is used to indicate 
someone's current efforts (and implied interests, concerns etc.), while 
pastProject describes what they've previously been doing.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
The phone of something is a phone, typically identified using the tel: URI 
scheme.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
The plan property provides a space for a
Person to hold some arbitrary content that would appear in
a traditional '.plan' file.  The plan file was stored in a user's home
directory on a UNIX machine, and displayed to people when the user was
queried with the finger utility.
A plan file could contain anything. Typical uses included brief comments, thoughts, or remarks on what a person had been doing lately. Plan files were also prone to being witty or simply osbscure. Others may be more creative, writing any number of seemingly random compositions in their plan file for people to stumble upon.
See History of the 
Finger Protocol by Rajiv Shah for more on this piece of Internet history. The 
geekcode property may also be of interest.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Document | |
| Range: | A thing | |
| Functional Property | ||
The primaryTopic property relates a document to the
main thing that the document is about.
The primaryTopic property is functional: for
any document it applies to, it can have at most one value. This is
useful, as it allows for data merging. In many cases it may be difficult
for third parties to determine the primary topic of a document, but in
a useful number of cases (eg. descriptions of movies, restaurants,
politicians, ...) it should be reasonably obvious. Documents are very
often the most authoritative source of information about their own
primary topics, although this cannot be guaranteed since documents cannot be
assumed to be accurate, honest etc.
It is an inverse of the isPrimaryTopicOf property, which relates a 
thing to  a document primarily about that thing. The choice between these two 
properties is purely pragmatic. When describing documents, we 
use primaryTopic former to point to the things they're about. When 
describing things (people etc.), it is useful to be able to directly cite documents which 
have those things as their main topic - so we use isPrimaryTopicOf. In this 
way, Web sites such as Wikipedia or NNDB can provide indirect identification for the things they 
have descriptions of.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | Document | 
The publications property indicates a Document
listing (primarily in human-readable form) some publications associated with the  
Person. Such documents are typically published alongside one's 
homepage.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | Document | 
The schoolHomepage property relates a Person to a 
Document that is the homepage of a School that the 
person attended.
FOAF does not (currently) define a class for 'School' (if it did, it would probably be as 
a sub-class of Organization). The original application area for 
schoolHomepage was for 'schools' in the British-English sense; however 
American-English usage has dominated, and it is now perfectly reasonable to describe 
Universities, Colleges and post-graduate study using schoolHomepage.
This very basic facility provides a basis for a low-cost, decentralised approach to classmate-reunion and suchlike. Instead of requiring a central database, we can use FOAF to express claims such as 'I studied here' simply by mentioning a school's homepage within FOAF files. Given the homepage of a school, it is easy for FOAF aggregators to lookup this property in search of people who attended that school.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
A number of naming constructs are under development to provide
naming substructure; draft properties include firstName,
givenName, and surname. These are not currently 
stable or consistent; see the issue 
tracker for design discussions, status and ongoing work on rationalising the FOAF 
naming machinery.
There is also a simple name property.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Image | 
| Range: | Image | 
The thumbnail property is a relationship between a 
full-size Image and a smaller, representative Image 
that has been derrived from it. 
It is typical in FOAF to express img and depiction 
relationships in terms of the larger, 'main' (in some sense) image, rather than its thumbnail(s). 
A thumbnail might be clipped or otherwise reduced such that it does not 
depict everything that the full image depicts. Therefore FOAF does not specify that a 
thumbnail depicts everything that the image it is derrived from depicts.
However, FOAF does expect that anything depicted in the thumbnail will also be depicted in 
the source image.
A thumbnail is typically small enough that it can be
loaded and viewed quickly before a viewer decides to download the larger
version. They are often used in online photo gallery applications.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | 
| Range: | Document | 
The tipjar property relates an Agent
to a Document that describes some mechanisms for
paying or otherwise rewarding that agent.
The tipjar property was created following discussions 
about simple, lightweight mechanisms that could be used to encourage 
rewards and payment for content exchanged online. An agent's
tipjar page(s) could describe informal ("Send me a
postcard!", "here's my book, music and movie wishlist") or formal
(machine-readable micropayment information) information about how that
agent can be paid or rewarded. The reward is not associated with any
particular action or content from the agent concerned. A link to 
a service such as PayPal is the
sort of thing we might expect to find in a tipjar document.
Note that the value of a tipjar property is just a
document (which can include anchors into HTML pages). We expect, but 
do not currently specify, that this will evolve into a hook
for finding more machine-readable information to support payments,
rewards. The OnlineAccount machinery is also relevant,
although the information requirements for automating payments are not 
currently clear.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Document | 
| Range: | A thing | 
The topic property relates a document to a thing that the document is 
about.
As such it is an inverse of the page property, which relates a thing to 
a document about that thing.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | A thing | 
The topic_interest property is generally found to be confusing and ill-defined 
and is a candidate for removal. The goal was to be link a person to some thing that is a topic 
of their interests (rather than, per interest to a page that is about such a 
topic). 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Range: | Document | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The weblog property relates a Agent to a weblog of 
that agent.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | Document | 
The workInfoHomepage of a Person is a 
Document that describes their work. It is generally (but not necessarily) a 
different document from their homepage, and from any 
workplaceHomepage(s) they may have. 
The purpose of this property is to distinguish those pages you often see, which describe someone's professional role within an organisation or project. These aren't really homepages, although they share some characterstics.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
| Range: | Document | 
The workplaceHomepage of a Person is a 
Document that is the homepage of a 
Organization that they work for.
By directly relating people to the homepages of their workplace, we have a simple convention that takes advantage of a set of widely known identifiers, while taking care not to confuse the things those identifiers identify (ie. organizational homepages) with the actual organizations those homepages describe.
For example, Dan Brickley works at W3C. Dan is a Person with a 
homepage of http://danbri.org/; W3C is a 
Organization with a homepage of http://www.w3.org/. This 
allows us to say that Dan has a workplaceHomepage of http://www.w3.org/.
<foaf:Person> <foaf:name>Dan Brickley</foaf:name> <foaf:workplaceHomepage rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/"/> </foaf:Person>
Note that several other FOAF properties work this way; 
schoolHomepage is the most similar. In general, FOAF often indirectly 
identifies things via Web page identifiers where possible, since these identifiers are widely 
used and known. FOAF does not currently have a term for the name of the relation (eg. 
"workplace") that holds 
between a Person and an Organization that they work for.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | testing | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
The yahooChatID property relates a Agent to a textual 
identifier assigned to them in the Yahoo online Chat system. 
See Yahoo's the Yahoo! Chat site for more details of their 
service. Yahoo chat IDs are also used across several other Yahoo services, including email and 
Yahoo! Groups.
See OnlineChatAccount (and OnlineAccount) for a
more general (and verbose) mechanism for describing IM and chat accounts.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | 
| Range: | Online Account | 
The account property relates a Agent to an 
OnlineAccount for which they are the sole account holder. See 
OnlineAccount for usage details.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Online Account | 
The accountName property of a OnlineAccount is a 
textual representation of the account name (unique ID) associated with that account.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Online Account | 
| Range: | Document | 
The accountServiceHomepage property indicates a relationship between a 
OnlineAccount and the homepage of the supporting service provider.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Functional Property | ||
The age property is a relationship between a Agent 
and an integer string representing their age in years. See also birthday. 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Spatial Thing | 
| Range: | Spatial Thing | 
The based_near relationship relates two "spatial 
things"
(anything that can be somewhere), the latter typically
described using the geo:lat / geo:long
geo-positioning vocabulary
(See GeoInfo in the W3C semweb
wiki for details). This allows us to say describe the typical latitute and 
longitude of, say, a Person (people are spatial things - they can be 
places) without implying that a precise location has been given.
We do not say much about what 'near' means in this context; it is a 'rough and ready' concept. For a more precise treatment, see GeoOnion vocab design discussions, which are aiming to produce a more sophisticated vocabulary for such purposes.
 FOAF files often make use of the contact:nearestAirport property. This
illustrates the distinction between FOAF documents (which may make claims using any RDF
vocabulary) and the core FOAF vocabulary defined by this specification. For further reading on
the use of nearestAirport see UsingContactNearestAirport in the 
FOAF wiki.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Functional Property | ||
The birthday property is a relationship between a Agent 
and a string representing the month and day in which they were born (Gregorian calendar).
See BirthdayIssue for details of related properties that can 
be used to describe such things in more flexible ways.
See also age.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
The dnaChecksum property is mostly a joke, but 
also a reminder that there will be lots of different identifying 
properties for people, some of which we might find disturbing. 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
The lastName property is provided (alongside firstName) as a mechanism to support legacy data that cannot be
easily interpreted in terms of the (otherwise preferred) familyName and givenName properties. The concepts 
of 'first' and 'last' names do not work well across cultural and linguistic boundaries; however they are widely used in addressbooks and databases.
See the issue tracker for design discussions, status and ongoing work on rationalising the FOAF naming machinery.
There is also a simple name property.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
The membershipClass property relates a Group to an RDF 
class representing a sub-class of Agent whose instances are all the 
agents that are a member of the Group.
See Group for details and examples.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | |
|---|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | |
| Range: | Document | |
| Inverse Functional Property | ||
A openid is a property of a Agent that associates it with a document that can be used as an indirect identifier in the manner of the OpenID
 "Identity URL". As the OpenID 1.1 specification notes, OpenID itself"does not provide any mechanism to 
exchange profile information, though Consumers of an Identity can learn more about an End User from any public, semantically 
interesting documents linked thereunder (FOAF, RSS, Atom, vCARD, etc.)". In this way, FOAF and OpenID complement each other; 
neither provides a stand-alone approach to online "trust", but combined they can address interesting parts of this larger problem 
space.
The openid property is "inverse functional", meaning that anything that is the foaf:openid of something, is the 
openid of no more than one thing. FOAF is agnostic as to whether there are (according to the relevant OpenID 
specifications) OpenID URIs that are equally associated with multiple Agents. FOAF offers sub-classes of Agent, ie. 
Organization and Group, that allow for such scenarios to be consistent with the notion that any 
foaf:openid is the foaf:openid of just one Agent.
FOAF does not mandate any particular URI scheme for use as openid values. The OpenID 1.1 specification includes a delegation model that is often used to 
allow a weblog or homepage document to also serve in OpenID authentication via "link rel" HTML markup. This deployment model provides a 
convenient connection to FOAF, since a similar technique is used for FOAF 
autodiscovery in HTML. A single document can, for example, serve both as a homepage and an OpenID identity URL.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Document | 
The sha1 property relates a Document to the textual form of 
a SHA1 hash of (some representation of) its contents.
The design for this property is neither complete nor coherent. The Document 
class is currently used in a way that allows multiple instances at different URIs to have the 
'same' contents (and hence hash). If sha1 is an owl:InverseFunctionalProperty, 
we could deduce that several such documents were the self-same thing. A more careful design is 
needed, which distinguishes documents in a broad sense from byte sequences.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | 
status is a short textual string expressing what the user is happy
for the general public (normally) to know about their current activity. mood, location, etc.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | unstable | 
|---|---|
This property is a candidate for deprecation in favour of 'honorificPrefix' following Portable Contacts usage. See the FOAF Issue Tracker.
The approriate values for title are not formally constrained, and will 
vary across community and context. Values such as 'Mr', 'Mrs', 'Ms', 'Dr' etc. are 
expected.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | archaic | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
This property is considered an archaic spelling of familyName.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | archaic | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | 
| Range: | A thing | 
The fundedBy property relates something to something else that has provided funding for it.
This property is tentatively considered archaic usage, unless we hear about positive implementation experience.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | archaic | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Person | 
The geekcode property is used to represent a 'Geek Code' for some 
Person. 
See the Wikipedia entry for 
details of the code, which provides a somewhat frivolous and willfully obscure mechanism for 
characterising technical expertise, interests and habits. The geekcode 
property is not bound to any particular version of the code. 
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | archaic | 
|---|---|
The givenName property is provided (alongside familyName) for use when describing parts of people's names. Although these
concepts do not capture the full range of personal naming styles found world-wide, they are commonly used and have some value. 
There is also a simple name property.
Support is also provided for the more archaic and culturally varying terminology of firstName and lastName.
See the issue tracker for design discussions, status and ongoing work on rationalising the FOAF naming machinery.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | archaic | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | Agent | 
| Range: | Online Account | 
This property is considered archaic usage. It is generally better to use account instead.
The holdsAccount property relates a Agent to an 
OnlineAccount for which they are the sole account holder. See 
OnlineAccount for usage details.
This property is equivalent to the account property, which 
was introduced primarily to provide simpler naming for the same idea.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
| Status: | archaic | 
|---|---|
| Domain: | A thing | 
| Range: | A thing | 
This property is considered archaic usage, and is not currently recommended for usage.
The theme property is rarely used and under-specified. The intention was 
to use it to characterise interest / themes associated with projects and groups. Further 
work is needed to meet these goals.
[#] [wiki] [back to top]
The description of the terms in the FOAF 'dictionary' often make reference to classes and properties elsewhere. This section of the FOAF specification provides a placeholder reference for any FOAF mention of externally defined terms. For example, sometimes we might say that FOAF property has a domain or range of an externally defined class, or that a FOAF class is a sub-class of an external class, or 'disjoint with' such a class (ie. has no common members). Such claims help fix the intended meaning of FOAF terms in relationship to other 'peer' vocabularies.
Each term in FOAF is annotated with properties from the SemWeb Vocab Status Ontology
This was created as an experiment in documenting FOAF's term-centric versioning model, in which a common fixed namespace URI is used, while term definitions slowly and independently evolve through different stability levels. This contrasts with other approaches to versioning which attach versioning information to larger sets of terms.
Note that this mechanism is itself somewhat experimental and evolvin. The definitions of 'stable', 'unstable', 'archaic' and 'testing' cannot be defined as global absolutes, but only in relationship to the practices, expectations and social structures around some vocabulary. For their use in FOAF, future versions of this specification could usefully offer more detail about what to expect from a term labelled 'stable'.
Members of the FOAF and W3C Semantic Web Interest Group communities collaborated in 2003 to create a very simple vocabulary that described points in geographic space. This is the W3CBasic Geo Vocabulary. It assumes use of the WGS84 reference system and defines properties geo:lat, geo:long and geo:alt in terms of a class geo:SpatialThing.
The foaf:based_near property relates a spatial thing (typically a foaf:Agent of some kind) to another spatial thing, which can be described using geo:lat, geo:long etc.
The FOAF dictionary of terms is defined using a family of W3C standards: RDF, RDF Schema and OWL. These share a data model and general approach, and provide for increasing levels of expressivity. Here we introduce the core OWL and RDF/S terms used directly in the machine-readable description of FOAF. See W3C's site for the latest and most authoritative OWL and RDF specifications.
FOAF is based on the exchange of free-form descriptions that are structured in terms of things having properties, where the value of each property is expressed as either textually (eg. a name or number), or by reference to another thing. FOAF (as an application of RDF) uses URI identifiers wherever possible to talk about things of interest, whether they are Web pages, classes of thing, properties of things, or even people. See the W3C Web Architecture specification for more background on URIs.
From core RDF, FOAF takes the notion that we are talking about things, and they fall into categories; we call these 'classes'. The core machinery we use from the RDF Schema and OWL technologies simply give us some built-in terminology for talking about things, classes and properties. Here we introduce some of these and discuss briefly how they relate to FOAF's approach to describing things.
The Dublin Core specification provides term definitions that focus on issues of resource discovery, document description and related concepts useful for cultural heritage and digital library applications. FOAF can be used alongside any variants of Dublin Core, but works most effectively with the most modern Dublin Core terms namespace. Note that here we use the prefix 'dct:' to stand for the DC Terms namespace; however it is not unusual to see 'dc' also used.
Earlier versions of this specification used an experimental companion namespace produced from the lexical database Wordnet (v1.6). This is currently offline, and corresponding sub-class relationships have been ommited from the FOAF documentation. More recent RDF representations of Wordnet now exist, however they don't map Wordnet synsets to classes, so can't be directly used here. Future versions of this specification might restore links to some version of Wordnet in RDF.
Many terms in the SIOC vocabulary are defined with reference to FOAF. See the SIOC project for details. Future versions of this specification may provide more information here.
There are far too many people who have contributed to the FOAF project to name everyone in this early-release of the new improved spec. FOAF wouldn't be such a fun project or be as widely known as it is today without the efforts, enthusiasm and intelligence of the folks who have contributed via the rdfweb-dev list, #foaf IRC channel, and FoafProject wiki site.
That said, a few milestones in FOAF's history should be mentioned. We owe particular thanks to Edd Dumbill for his IBM developerWorks articles (which attracted the affections of the Weblogging crowd) and for his Foafbot application whose evolution those articles have tracked. Also Morten Frederiksen's FoafExplorer, Daniel Krech's Web View aggregator, Jim Ley and Liz Turner's work on FOAFNaut, which alongside FOAFbot, ˆhave been instrumental in showing how FOAF data can be collected and used. Meanwhile Leigh Dodd's foaf-a-matic has been the data creation tool that has been most people's gateway to FOAFdom. FOAF also owes a lot to the folks at Ecademy, TypePad and elsewhere for showing how end users can share FOAF self-descriptions on the Web without ever seeing a line of XML syntax. Jo Walsh has enthused many about hooking FOAF up to Geo and mapping data, as has Matt Biddulph by explaining the workings of his FOAF harvesting and image metadata tools. FOAF has also benefited greatly from documentation contributed in non-English languages, many thanks to all contributors of translations (foaf-a-matic and other docs). FOAF is now arguably better documented in Japanese and Spanish than in English, thanks to Masahide Kanzaki and Leandro Mariano Lopez (inkel) respectively. Thanks also to Chris Schmidt for fixing up the spec generation tool (now a Python/Redland script), as well as for contributing numerous cool hacks to the FOAF community. To Richard Cyganiak and others in IRC for (amongst much else) help debugging Apache configurations. To Ian Davis for his wonderful FOAF Logo. And last but not least, Marc Canter is in a class of his own. Thanks all, and to those who aren't listed here yet, but who made a difference...
This brief survey only scratches the surface of a growing body of work. Sincere thanks to all who have contributed tools, documentation, brain cells and enthusiasm to this project. We should also mention that FOAF would not be possible without the collaborative and opensource efforts of the RDF developer community, both in terms of idea sharing (#swig etc) and freely available tools (Jena, Redland, RDFlib, Cwm, Sesame, 3store etc).