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

Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:29:18 -0400
Message-ID: <51B35BDE.2040207@openlinksw.com>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
CC: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
On 6/7/13 8:22 PM, David Booth wrote:
>> RDF based Linked Data is how we should refer to Linked Data that's based
>> on RDF. Otherwise, we are simply fighting a justifiably losing battle
>> trying to pack the generic phrase "Linked Data" into the already
>> over-conflated bucket called "RDF".
>
> AFAICT, the only conflating that's going on here is that you are 
> conflating the generic (non-web) concept of "linking data" (i.e., 
> connecting data) with the specific concept of "Linked Data", i.e., the 
> term coined by TimBL as a better way to talk about the semantic web.
>
> David 

No!

Structured Data Representation using Pointers isn't an RDF invention. 
Neither is it something that manifested as a result of TimBL's Linked 
Data meme or his actual conceptualization and creation of the World Wied 
Web application/system/platform.

Even right now, as I type, the concept of Linked Data (pick any version 
of TimBL's meme and mesh with RDF specs) is simply about making 
structured data representation Web-like.

Web-like (or Webby) != World Wide Web .

Of course, when you arrive at Web-like (i.e. Webby) via HTTP URIs the 
Web expands on a global scale, courtesy of the Internet.

The biggest problem with RDF is that poor narratives have obscured 
almost every path to actually understanding and appreciating its utility.

Even if everything I've said the years is absolute nonsense, why on 
earth would anyone assume that (circa. 2013) the best approach to mass 
acceptance of Linked Data boils down to inextricably binding it to RDF?

There are no technical, commercial, educational,  or marketing merits of 
any kind to narratives that conflate RDF and Linked Data.

I note, the TAG is already considering revising the use of "Resource" in 
AWWW. Once that happens, we might even realize that RDF is better served 
as meaning: Relations Description Framework :-)

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







Received on Saturday, 8 June 2013 16:29:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:57 UTC