W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sweo-ig@w3.org > November 2006

Re: 20 reasons "rdf sucks"

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 19:03:50 +0000
Message-Id: <E9B3C0AD-7476-499F-B4F2-ECE7F0CA673B@garlik.com>
Cc: public-sweo-ig@w3.org, "Bill de hOra" <bill@dehora.net>
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>


On 18 Nov 2006, at 18:28, Danny Ayers wrote:

>
> The other day I challenged Bill deHora to be more specific about some
> criticism. Soon after he gave a solid response [1], but in passing
> suggested: "typing rdf sucks into a search engine is a good start".
> Out of curiosity I tried it, checking the first 20 hits on Google.
> Obviously it's not exactly stringent test of popular opinion, but it
> was quite interesting (and Bill was right about views on RDF/XML).
>
> In summary, RDF sucks because of -
>
> RDF/XML : 5

I have to say I'm not a huge fan of RDF/XML myself, whilst an XML  
serialisation is important RDF/XML is difficult to write and very  
hard to generate neatly. It's a pain to parse too.

My experiences of introducing developers to RDF is that they  
generally take to N3/Turtle or NTriples much more easily. The RDF/XML  
syntax is a lot to pick up on top of the RDF model.

- Steve
Received on Saturday, 18 November 2006 19:04:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:34 GMT