W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp@w3.org > March 2013

Re: Section 4: LDPR/non-LDPR formal definitions

From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:44:34 -0700
Message-ID: <5150D352.7040403@berkeley.edu>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
CC: public-ldp@w3.org
hello.

On 2013-03-25 15:24 , Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 3/25/13 6:15 PM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>> On 25 Mar 2013, at 22:01, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>>> RDF
>>> based Linked Data should have always had a media type which is akin
>>> to actually doing the dishes.
>> I think that text/turtle is that media type, or rather, can be it.
> It could be, but I fear we would then stall its current progress by
> requesting incorporation of Linked Data de-reference behavior
> expectations into its current IANA registration.

to me this really is the core problem that we are dancing around in many 
places. most often, i refer to this as hyperRDF: RDF plus hypermedia 
semantics, established in a way that clients can traverse RDF-based 
hypermedia applications. how this is engineered (adding to RDF as a 
conceptual model, or defining an ontology that must be supported by 
anybody wishing to write hyperRDF clients) is an interesting question 
(with different side effects based on the chosen path), but the 
fundamental question underlying this so far does not have a definitive 
answer: how do i expose RDF-based services in a way so that applications 
are guided through the application flow by following links. LDP has to 
answer this general problem one way or another, and preferably there 
would have been an answer to this in place that we could simply use. 
there isn't, so it remains a challenge and one that obviously isn't 
trivially easy to solve.

cheers,

dret.
Received on Monday, 25 March 2013 22:45:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:03:10 UTC