- From: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>
- Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 20:53:15 +0300
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
With due respect, I think it would be foolish to burn the bridges to XML. The XML standards and infrastructure are very well developed, much more so than JSON-LD's. We use XSLT extensively on RDF/XML. Martynas graphityhq.com On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:03 PM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > Side note: RDF/XML was the first RDF serialization standardized, over 15 > years ago, at a time when XML was all the buzz. Since then other > serializations have been standardized that are far more human friendly to > read and write, and easier for programmers to use, such as Turtle and > JSON-LD. > > However, even beyond ease of use, one of the biggest problems with RDF/XML > that I and others have seen over the years is that it misleads people into > thinking that RDF is a dialect of XML, and it is not. I'm sure this > misconception was reinforced by the unfortunate depiction of XML in the > foundation of the (now infamous) semantic web layer cake of 2001, which in > hindsight is just plain wrong: > http://www.w3.org/2001/09/06-ecdl/slide17-0.html > (Admittedly JSON-LD may run a similar risk, but I think that risk is > mitigated now by the fact that RDF is already more established in its own > right.) > > I encourage all RDF publishers to use one of the other standard RDF formats > such as Turtle or JSON-LD. All commonly used RDF tools now support Turtle, > and many or most already support JSON-LD. > > RDF/XML is not officially deprecated, but I personally hope that in the next > round of RDF updates, we will quietly thank RDF/XML for its faithful service > and mark it as deprecated. > > David Booth >
Received on Thursday, 3 September 2015 17:53:44 UTC