Closed congruili closed 9 years ago
givenName makes sense (and probably we should change the database field to "given" too) since this is the term used by crossref, which is a source of much of the data.
:+1: for using foaf:givenName
in general.
I believe the original question resolves around whether there is an appropriate property for a first name + middle initial (e.g. "Stephan T."). I believe foaf:givenName
is valid for this use case.
Fine here. Also, the question resolves around use of the first initial and middle name (e.g. "John Doe" has an official name of "A. John Doe." We have several examples of this in GCIS.
To clarify my comment, is foaf:givenName used correctly at: http://data.globalchange.gov/person/903.thtml
If so, then I'd say let's close this issue since it won't involve changes.
@justgo129 I think so. givenName was defined so that it would not be as restrictive as firstName and could handle 'describing parts of people's names'. I think our current usage of the property is consistent with it's intent and we can close this issue without making any changes.
Great. I will close #57 and denote it as such on the list of proposed changes. Result of issue: no change in template necessary,
Can we create a term which reflects a string containing a person’s first name and middle initial, similar to foaf:firstName and foaf:lastName? Or, is foaf:givenName, which we have been using in-lieu of gcis:firstName, sufficient? (Someone’s comment): What about foaf:name or foaf:nick? The original intent of foaf had heritage in social networking context though.