is linked data about RDF or EAV or just structured data?

hello kingsley.

changing the subject to make it a little easier for people to ignore this
selectively. but i am enjoying this.

On 2012-08-07 15:43 , "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>On 8/7/12 9:15 AM, Wilde, Erik wrote:
>>understand how you end up on that middle ground (it's not RDF, but it's
>> EAV), and saying that it is "intrinsically" like that does not really
>> explain where this perspective originates.
>Maybe we should look at it from a different perspective. What is your
>understanding of structured data? In my case it boils down to data
>representation where the relationship between an entity, its attributes,
>and its attribute values are clearly discernible. Syntaxes for
>expressing the aforementioned vary.

i am a mostly a REST guy. so as a very primitive starting point,
structured data is whatever you define as a media type. it can be as
simple as CSV, or more complex metamodels such as XML or RDF. to be in
line with REST, you need to make sure that the media type has hypermedia
controls in it, and those should be based on URIs as identifiers. what
kind of URI scheme you choose is already up to you, REST just tells you
that interactions should be driven by links, so it needs to be a URI
scheme that clients can use to initiate interactions. that's about all you
can say about the constraints driven by REST.

your starting point of "an entity, its attributes, its attributes values"
is already driven by more specific constraints, and i am curious to learn
where they originate, and what they are. or asking the other way around,
if you have a non-EAV model (such as atom) that has a well-defined
interaction model based on hypermedia controls, does that even qualify as
"structured data" in your perspective?

cheers,

dret.

Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2012 14:03:12 UTC