W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

From: Yihong Ding <ding@cs.byu.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:21:23 -0400
Message-ID: <8cbe5b450906290521h5433af90ma7faccc5bebb3995@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org, public-lod@w3.org, semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Hi Kingley and Martin,

A potential problem of the model Martin suggested is that the same data has
to be presented at least TWICE in one document. Although the RDFa portion of
the data is supposed to be automatically generated, it, however, does not
prohibit anybody from manually revising it. Therefore, it leaves a huge hole
for the hackers (or anybody who want to do some deceptive job). In our
imperfect world, this problem is severe.

Adding an extra layer of data mapping always causes additional work on data
maintenance. This time, the extra work could be a nightmare though the
architecture is neat.

yihong


On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>wrote:

> Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
>
>> Hi Tom:
>>
>> >Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some
>> >great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's
>> >not oversell it.
>> We seem to agree on the observation, but not on the conclusion. What I
>> want and suggest is using RDFa also for exchanging a bit more complex RDF
>> models / data by simply using a lot of div / span or whatever elements that
>> represent the RDF part in the SAME document BUT NOT too closely linked with
>> the presentation level.
>>
>> <body>
>> <h1>This is the car I want to sell</h1>
>> Actually, a pretty cool car, for only $1.000. Offer valid through July 31,
>> 2009
>>
>> <span>
>> ... my whole RDF in RDFa
>>  </span>
>> <body>
>>
>> The advantage of that would be that
>>
>> - you just have to maintain ONE file,
>> - data and metadata are close by, so the likelihood of being up to date
>> increases, and
>> - at the same time, the code does not get too messy.
>> - Also - no problems setting up the server (*).
>> - Easy to create on-line tools that generate RDFa snippets for simple
>> pasting.
>> - Yahoo and Google will most likely honor RDFa meta-data only.
>>
>> Also note that often the literal values will be in content attributes
>> anyway, because the string for the presentation is not suitable as meta-data
>> content anyway (e.g.  dates, country codes,...)
>>
>> I think the approach sketched above would be a cheap and useful way of
>> publishing RDF meta-data. It could work with CMS / blogging software etc.
>>  Imaging if we were able to allow eBay sellers to put GoodRelations
>> meta-data directly into the open XHTML part of their product description.
>>
>> The main problem with my proposal is that there is the risk that Google
>> considers this "cloaking" and may remove respective resources from their
>> index (Mark raised that issue). If that risk was confirmed, we would really
>> have a problem. Imagine me selling Semantic Web markup as a step beyond SEO
>> ... and the first consequence of following my advice is being removed from
>> the Google index.
>>
>> A second problem is that if the document contains nodes that have no
>> counterpart on the presentation level (e.g. intermediate nodes for holding
>> n-ary relations), then they will also not be dereferencable. The same holds
>> for URIs or  nodes that are outside the scope of the actual RDFa / XHTML
>> document - I see no simple way of serving neither XHTML nor RDF content for
>> those.
>>
> Martin,
>
> If Google doesn't see invisible DIVs as cloaking, the issue vaporizes.
>
> Also, if people take the SEO + SDQ (Linked Data Expressed in RDFa) approach
> they will at least remain in the Google index via usual SEO oriented keyword
> gimmickry, albeit generally suboptimal.
>
> If we make a recipe doc showcasing these issues, we will more than likely
> get Google to recalibrate back to the Web; especially if we can demonstrate
> that other search engine players --that have support RDFa -- not being
> afflicted with the same cloaking myopia.
>
> Kingsley
>
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom Heath wrote:
>>
>>> Martin,
>>>
>>> 2009/6/27 Martin Hepp (UniBW) <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>:
>>>
>>>
>>>> So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a
>>>> problem.
>>>>
>>>> The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a)
>>>> the
>>>> human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data link
>>>> to
>>>> the same literals, the problematic is it in reality once the structure
>>>> of a)
>>>> and b) are very different.
>>>>
>>>> For very simple property-value pairs, embedding RDFa markup is no
>>>> problem.
>>>> But if you have a bit more complexity at the conceptual level and in
>>>> particular if there are significant differences to the structure of the
>>>> presentation (e.g. in terms of granularity, ordering of elements, etc.),
>>>> it
>>>> gets very, very messy and hard to maintain.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some
>>> great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's
>>> not oversell it.
>>>
>>> Tom.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> martin hepp
>> e-business & web science research group
>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>>
>> e-mail:  mhepp@computer.org
>> phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
>> fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
>> www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
>>         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
>> skype:   mfhepp twitter: mfhepp
>>
>> Check out the GoodRelations vocabulary for E-Commerce on the Web of Data!
>> ========================================================================
>>
>> Webcast:
>> http://www.heppnetz.de/projects/goodrelations/webcast/
>>
>> Talk at the Semantic Technology Conference 2009: "Semantic Web-based
>> E-Commerce: The GoodRelations Ontology"
>> http://tinyurl.com/semtech-hepp
>>
>> Tool for registering your business:
>> http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/tools/goodrelations-annotator/
>>
>> Overview article on Semantic Universe:
>> http://tinyurl.com/goodrelations-universe
>>
>> Project page and resources for developers:
>> http://purl.org/goodrelations/
>>
>> Tutorial materials:
>> Tutorial at ESWC 2009: The Web of Data for E-Commerce in One Day: A
>> Hands-on Introduction to the GoodRelations Ontology, RDFa, and Yahoo!
>> SearchMonkey
>>
>> http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations_Tutorial_ESWC2009
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen       Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
> President & CEO OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
===================================
Yihong Ding

http://yihongs-research.blogspot.com/
Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 12:22:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:21 UTC