W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Linked Data discussions require better communication

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 14:27:12 -0400
Message-ID: <51C34980.6040105@dbooth.org>
To: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
CC: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
On 06/20/2013 12:54 PM, Giovanni Tummarello wrote:
> My 2c is .. i agree with kingsley diagram , linked data should be
> possible without RDF (no matter serialization) :)
> however this is different from previous definitions

Remember: if the data is not standards-based interpretable as RDF 
(though it doesn't have to *look* like RDF) then it does not support the 
goal of the Semantic Web, because it creates walled gardens, as 
explained in more detail here:

I prefer a definition of "Linked Data" that supports the goal of the 
Semantic Web.  I would venture to guess that that was the entire reason 
that TimBL coined the term: to support the goals of the Semantic Web.

Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 18:27:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:37 UTC