W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-powderwg@w3.org > September 2008

Re: PROPOSED RESOLUTION on Arbitrary RDF in POWDER

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:33:00 +1000
To: "Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich" <k.scheppe@telekom.de>, "Public POWDER" <public-powderwg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uh2elayswxe0ny@widsith.local>

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:58:47 +1000, Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich  
<k.scheppe@telekom.de> wrote:

> I think that dropping this outweighs the inconvenience of having to
> create a separate profile.

Agreed (unsurprisingly).

> I am a fan of separation of concerns, especially in the early stages.
> Opera's point of view goes in the direction of potentially increasing
> the uptake for this technology.
>
> Furthermore I think it would be a good think for companies and
> organizations to create profiles that describe them. This information
> could be used all over the place.

Again, agreed.

> What I cannot judge is if we loose flexibility by limiting the RDF in
> POWDER docs.

Well, so long as we insist that you point to a real RDF file, you have  
increased flexibility by being able to work with real RDF frameworks,  
while reserving implementability.

> However, I think this ability may well be reserved for future versions
> of POWDER.

I don't think, in the short term, that we should anticipate a change.  
There will be small devices and specific use cases which are best served  
by enabling a form of POWDER they can use. At the same time, the current  
approach maintains POWDER as a full semantic web citizen designed to work  
well with real RDF frameworks. So we already have the ability for any use  
case that wants it.

(This is analgous to the early FOAF work, which by relying on distributed  
files for raw data that could be anything, was real semantic web, although  
many use cases like the "six-degrees by photo" co-depiction project, or  
the FOAFnaut browsing application relied on the ability to simplify the  
information to make it work on devices of the day - often more powerful  
devices than the ones we are targeting).

cheers

Chaals

> Kai
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-powderwg-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:public-powderwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Phil Archer
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 3:59 PM
>> To: Public POWDER
>> Subject: PROPOSED RESOLUTION on Arbitrary RDF in POWDER
>>
>>
>> During Monday's telecon, it was agreed that all WG members
>> should have a chance to express an opinion on the issue of
>> whether or not we allow unrestricted RDF to be included
>> within POWDER documents. Specifically this affects:
>>
>> 1. The ability to include FOAF/DC info within the document as
>> opposed to separately
>>
>> 2. The ability to include arbitrary RDF in the descriptor sets.
>>
>> This issue is flagged as a Feature at Risk within the Formal doc [1].
>> Opera has made the case for dropping this feature [2] - i.e.
>> *requiring* all POWDER documents to be attributed to an
>> entity described in a separate file and limiting the
>> expressivity of descriptor sets to literal values and RDF resources.
>>
>> Opera's principal reason for asking for this to be dropped is
>> that for some applications, processing of POWDER purely as
>> XML is possible without the need for an RDF processor to be
>> included. Such applications include the mobile device
>> paradigm where processing power, memory etc.
>> are limited.
>>
>> Vodafone has indicated support for this position [3].
>>
>> In the other corner is NCSR who argue that requiring an
>> external FOAF file (or its DC homologue) is an unnecessary
>> burden on POWDER authors (as evidence, Ivan H points out that
>> W3C doesn't have a FOAF file).
>> Limiting the expressivity of POWDER by design goes against
>> natural best practice (I paraphrase - Stasinos/Antonis may
>> wish to correct me).
>>
>> I am keen to get this resolved no later than Monday's call.
>> If you have a view, please express it on this list.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Phil.
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-powder-formal-20080815/#status
>> [2]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2008Sep/0020.html
>> [3]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2008Sep/0022.html
>>
>> --
>> Phil Archer
>> Chief Technical Officer,
>> Family Online Safety Institute
>> w. http://www.fosi.org/people/philarcher/
>>
>> Register now for the annual Family Online Safety Institute
>> Conference and Exhibition, December 11th, 2008, Washington, DC.
>> See http://www.fosi.org/conference2008/
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://www.opera.com
Received on Friday, 26 September 2008 01:33:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:42:13 GMT