December 17, 2002

FOAF Myers Briggs addition

So after discussions sprawling across IRC, email and various weblogs, we are going ahead with adding a property called foaf:myersBriggs to the FOAF vocabulary. This property takes as its values the 16 codes (INTP, ENFP etc.) used in the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality description scheme.

Example FOAF snippet:

<foaf:Person>
<foaf:name>Dan Brickley</foaf:name>
<foaf:mbox rdf:resource="mailto:danbri@rdfweb.org"/ >
<foaf:myersBriggs>INTP</foaf:myersBriggs>
</foaf:Person>

Adding such markup will make it possible to browse, search and filter FOAF-related data using the MBTI classifications. For example, you might use it to search for weblogs created by people with some specified Myers Briggs entry (perhaps to check out to see if they fit the expected stereotype...? ;-).

There are a bunch of MBTI-related web sites out there; the Open Directory listing gives some reasonable starting points. The HumanMetrics site has an online version, which is probably what you're after if you just want a four letter code to paste into your FOAF description. For those taking this more seriously, the Personality Page has commentary and characterisation of the various distinctions emphasised in the MBTI.

For what it's worth I don't take MBTI too seriously as a piece of science, but it's interesting to see how people fit (or don't fit) into their scheme, and (like all of FOAF) it is entirely optional. Only publish a foaf:myersBriggs classification if you're happy making such information public. Same goes for your foaf:geekCode or foaf:schoolHomepage.

More detailed exploration of RDF/XML vocabulary for this sort of thing will probably happen in other vocabularies than FOAF, for example in Bill Kearney's draft MBTI namespace. There are of course dozens of other similar schemes and online questionnaires that we could hook up to FOAF, but this should make for an interesting toe in the water.

Unless anyone finds some huge flaw or better idea in the next week, we'll add this to the FOAF vocabulary documentation later this month.

Posted by danbri at December 17, 2002 12:20 AM
Comments

Hi...

I studing RDF and mail filtering

^^; But I don't know that there is any mechanism
in FAOF...

Just Merging some information?

Um... is there any paper or treatise?

If you are... Please give me ^^a

Good night! bye

Posted by: kensin noh on March 13, 2003 02:42 PM

The Myers-Briggs addition is a mistake. It is only one way to label people and it ultimately tells you nothing about how people relate to others. The test is only helpful for team-building...to help team members understand the tendencies of others as they are collaborating on a project. This is an inherently flawed approach.

Posted by: Chad Manney on March 27, 2003 09:21 PM

I've now got INFP in my FOAF, but that's results from a couple years ago. Is there any good place to retest?

This stuff could come in handy for the epersonality matching aspect of the personals-seeking robot dog.

Posted by: Richard Soderberg on May 5, 2003 10:47 PM

This will allow us to use a few functions we didn't have access to before. These lines are still a mystery for now, but we'll explain them soon. Now we'll start working within the main function, where favoriteNumber is declared and used. The first thing we need to do is change how we declare the variable. Instead of

Posted by: Polidore on January 20, 2004 07:24 AM

This variable is then used in various lines of code, holding values given it by variable assignments along the way. In the course of its life, a variable can hold any number of variables and be used in any number of different ways. This flexibility is built on the precept we just learned: a variable is really just a block of bits, and those bits can hold whatever data the program needs to remember. They can hold enough data to remember an integer from as low as -2,147,483,647 up to 2,147,483,647 (one less than plus or minus 2^31). They can remember one character of writing. They can keep a decimal number with a huge amount of precision and a giant range. They can hold a time accurate to the second in a range of centuries. A few bits is not to be scoffed at.

Posted by: Adlard on January 20, 2004 07:24 AM

Seth Roby graduated in May of 2003 with a double major in English and Computer Science, the Macintosh part of a three-person Macintosh, Linux, and Windows graduating triumvirate.

Posted by: Blanche on January 20, 2004 07:24 AM

This back and forth is an important concept to understand in C programming, especially on the Mac's RISC architecture. Almost every variable you work with can be represented in 32 bits of memory: thirty-two 1s and 0s define the data that a simple variable can hold. There are exceptions, like on the new 64-bit G5s and in the 128-bit world of AltiVec

Posted by: Joyce on January 20, 2004 07:25 AM

When compared to the Stack, the Heap is a simple thing to understand. All the memory that's left over is "in the Heap" (excepting some special cases and some reserve). There is little structure, but in return for this freedom of movement you must create and destroy any boundaries you need. And it is always possible that the heap might simply not have enough space for you.

Posted by: Abacuck on January 20, 2004 07:25 AM

The rest of our conversion follows a similar vein. Instead of going through line by line, let's just compare end results: when the transition is complete, the code that used to read:

Posted by: Samuel on January 20, 2004 07:25 AM

But some variables are immortal. These variables are declared outside of blocks, outside of functions. Since they don't have a block to exist in they are called global variables (as opposed to local variables), because they exist in all blocks, everywhere, and they never go out of scope. Although powerful, these kinds of variables are generally frowned upon because they encourage bad program design.

Posted by: Rawsone on January 20, 2004 07:26 AM

We can see an example of this in our code we've written so far. In each function's block, we declare variables that hold our data. When each function ends, the variables within are disposed of, and the space they were using is given back to the computer to use. The variables live in the blocks of conditionals and loops we write, but they don't cascade into functions we call, because those aren't sub-blocks, but different sections of code entirely. Every variable we've written has a well-defined lifetime of one function.

Posted by: Augustus on January 20, 2004 07:26 AM

When Batman went home at the end of a night spent fighting crime, he put on a suit and tie and became Bruce Wayne. When Clark Kent saw a news story getting too hot, a phone booth hid his change into Superman. When you're programming, all the variables you juggle around are doing similar tricks as they present one face to you and a totally different one to the machine.

Posted by: Dionise on January 20, 2004 07:27 AM

The Stack is just what it sounds like: a tower of things that starts at the bottom and builds upward as it goes. In our case, the things in the stack are called "Stack Frames" or just "frames". We start with one stack frame at the very bottom, and we build up from there.

Posted by: Ferdinand on January 20, 2004 07:27 AM

sms sprüche

Posted by: handylogos on January 22, 2004 01:31 PM

win $100,000

Posted by: play online golf on January 23, 2004 08:06 AM

nice site

Posted by: philadelphia hotel on January 23, 2004 08:06 AM

nice site

Posted by: escorts on January 23, 2004 08:06 AM

excellent

Posted by: online casino on January 23, 2004 08:07 AM
Post a comment