Re: what about RDF format? from Bijan Parsia on 2005-03-24 (public-rdf-dawg@w3.org from January to March 2005)

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:16:16 -0500
To: "Yoshio FUKUSHIGE" <fuku@w3.org>
Cc: <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <5996c04aa2a1fa420b0d08e69911e337@isr.umd.edu>

I tend to be against an RDF format for these sorts of things (either 
the query syntax or the results form, except for constructed graphs, 
obviously). These are not RDF's strength.

I wouldn't object, of course, as I do know some people like that sort 
of thing. But I would certainly evangelize against it.

(Things RDF is good for: KR style assertions, incomplete information, 
flexible and extensible structure, etc.

Things RDF is bad for: regular structure, record like data, especially 
in tablular form, documents, formats that need "validation" style 
checking, etc.)

To echo Eric, being able to process results bindings without having to 
drop back up to something like SPARQL, is helpful :)

Cheers,
Bijan.

Received on Thursday, 24 March 2005 04:16:20 UTC