W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2006

Re: add Turtle examples to specs

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:38:57 -1000
Message-ID: <4411E3E1.5090007@ibiblio.org>
To: 'Semantic Web' <semantic-web@w3.org>

I was wondering, perhaps it would be useful for the W3C or some
standards body to "endorse" one of the simplified XML syntax choices for
RDF and a compact notation ala Turtle ... then future RDF applications
could standardize around both a simplified XML syntax like TriX and a
compact notation like Turtles. However, when teaching this to people I
have no choice but to use RDF/XML because, well, that's *the standard*
despite the excellent support in many libraries for alternative
syntactic forms. Hmmm...isn't there a Semantic Web Best Practices
working group whose charter might fall in?

 I have to admit I was teaching students about RSS using both RSS 1.0
and vanilla RSS 2.0  a while back and they had no difficulty with N3
syntax and the RDF concepts, but RDF/XML was difficult.
I feel the lack of uptake of RDF in the Web "2.0" circles and many
sectors of industry is partially just due to the bureaucracy of syntax.
It would be a pity if such a minor notational issue caused some of the
good ideas behind RDF to not be understood or used.

                           harry halpin

Darren Chamberlain wrote:
> * Martin Hepp <martin.hepp at deri.org> [2006/03/10 18:47]:
>> You are so damn right - I personally think that the pure existence of
>> RDF/XML has been a major inhibitor for the spread of RDF, since many
>> XML-educated people are unable to take of the XML glasses...
> I'll second this -- RDF/XML was the biggest impediment to me grokking
> what RDF was all about.  It quickly became about the syntax and not the
> model.
> (darren)
Received on Friday, 10 March 2006 20:40:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:50 UTC