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

Re: Collection of Comments re. RDF/XML

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 08:48:00 -0500
Message-ID: <456EE110.6010605@openlinksw.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: public-sweo-ig@w3.org

Ivan Herman wrote:
> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>   
>> All,
>>
>> As I said during the SWEO meeting earlier today, RDF/XML the
>> "Serialization Format" is too often intermingled with RDF the "Data
>> Model". It is extremely important that we make separation of the
>> "Serialization Format" and actual "Data Model" the cornerstone of
>> improved clarity about the constituent parts of the Semantic Web vision.
>>
>> The Semantic Web (as I see it) will be comprised of Physical & Virtual
>> Graphs. The Physical Graphs (typically for import, export, or basic
>> syndication gem purposes etc.) will be in the form of: RDF/XML,
>> N3/Turtle, or anything else. Thus, we cannot have RDF/XML dominate
>> discussion about the RDF Data Model in general. An example this problem
>> is illustrated via the current the Semantic "Stack Cake" Diagram
>> <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/diagrams/sweb-stack/2006a.png>.
>>
>>     
>
> About this layercake: there has been a long discussion on the layercake
> diagram on the Semantic Web Coordination group some months ago. It was
> initiated by the fact that the way the Rules work is in the stack is not
> really in line with their lines. After discussions, here are two
> versions that we ended up with:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/layerCake-2.png
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/layerCake-4.png
>
> I think the second is closer to the rules people's work and mindset
>
>   
>> I will provide a URI for an enhancement to the current "Stack Cake" that
>> attempts to diffuse the aforementioned RDF/XML  issue.
>>
>>     
>
> As said: this work has already been done, and I think it reflects those
> issues as well...
>
> Ivan
>   

Ivan,

Certainly an improvement over the current Cake, but the issue of XML 
remains. XML should be stacked vertically in a rectangle labeled: 
"Serialization Format" or "Interchange",  that also contains N3, Turtle, 
others. This would be in pillar like fashion just  like "crypto". In 
addition, there should be a bottom layer rectangle for "Data", "Data 
Sources", or "Data Providers".  That's all I believe needs to be added 
to the layer cake for now with the goal of separating the RDF Model from 
the Serialization Formats.

I will send my rendition attempt of the latest cake diagram that 
reflects my comments above.

Kingsley
>
>   
>> With regards to the broader RDF/XML frustrations from the Web Community
>> in general, here are a few links that typify general thinking about
>> RDF/XML confusion:
>>
>> 1. Norman Walsh: http://norman.walsh.name/2004/07/30/rdfxml
>> 2. Stefano's attempt to clarify the same matter:
>> http://www.betaversion.org/~stefano/linotype/news/57/
>>
>> BTW - This doc <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/RDF-XML.html> speaks
>> volumes about the matter at hand (the kicker is right at the end of the
>> page :-) ).
>>
>> The Web 2.0 community is dominated (thought leadership wise) by XML
>> partisans (people that like to scrape and manipulate TEXT from an array
>> of sources, the only thing that matters to these individuals is data in
>> TEXT format and the Structure of the container. "Meaning" and "Context"
>> (Semantic Web essence) aren't that important to this mind-set (this is
>> why they Mash rather than Mesh Data). Note, XML's heritage (i.e. SGML )
>> also provides clues to the orientation of most XML practitioners  i.e. 
>> publishers and journalists rather than Data & Information Architects.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen          Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>> President & CEO OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>
>   
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2006 13:48:46 GMT

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