Re: Lack of RDF/XML examples in new standards

Hi all,

I agree with Stephen. From an (ontology engineering) *practitioner* 
point of view XML still is *the* data exchange format today. Even if N3 
or turtle are supposed to me more reader friendly I prefer RDF/XML 
because I can paste the examples directly into all my systems. And 
because of that it is the format I do understand best. :-)

Johannes

Stephen Bounds wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I was just reading through the SKOS Primer and saw that "this Primer, 
> together with the SKOS Reference document [SKOS-REFERENCE], replaces the 
> earlier SKOS Core Guide [SWBP-SKOS-CORE-GUIDE] and the SKOS Core 
> Vocabulary Specification [SWBP-SKOS-CORE-SPEC], which are now deprecated".
> 
> I think this is a mistake.  One of the best things about the Core Guide 
> and Vocabulary Spec was that they have an extensive set of RDF/XML 
> examples which, let's face it, form the vast bulk of implemented RDF 
> systems.
> 
> Replacing RDF/XML notation with tuple notation in the Primer and 
> References places a great big roadblock to understanding for those who 
> are looking for an easy XML language to describe and interrelate concepts.
> 
> Sure, the superceded documents are still available but people won't know 
> to go to older versions to find these examples.
> 
> In all probability, I wouldn't have taken the time to understand how 
> SKOS worked without having RDF/XML examples available to read and 
> understand.  I can see many others making the same decision, and I think 
> it has the potential to seriously impact on SKOS uptake.
> 
> Just my 2c,
> 
> -- Stephen.
> 
> 


-- 
Dr. Johannes Busse, Senior Researcher
An der RaumFabrik 29, D-76227 Karlsruhe
Reg. Office: Karlsruhe, Amtsger. Mannheim, HRB 109540
Managing Directors:    Prof.Dr.J.Angele,  H.P.Schnurr
http://www.ontoprise.de   | phone x49(721) 509 809-62
mailto:busse@ontoprise.de | mobile x49(163) 509 80-62

Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 08:24:58 UTC