W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2007

Re: RDF/XML and named graphs

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:12:06 +0000
Cc: "Steffen Staab" <staab@uni-koblenz.de>, "Peter Ansell" <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, "Fabien Gandon" <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr>, p.roe@qut.edu.au, j.hogan@qut.edu.au, "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7D2B5F20-9E5A-420D-BC4B-21BFA6031EDF@cyganiak.de>
To: "Chris Richard" <chris.richard@gmail.com>


On 18 Dec 2007, at 14:33, Chris Richard wrote:
> Am I fundamentally misguided in believing that RDF/XML provides no
> benefits over other text formats like N3 and TriG, other than being,
> nominally, XML? XML tool support seems mostly invalidated by the fact
> that we're using a format designed to encode hierarchical data to
> encode non-hierarchical data. I can't figure out why I might want to
> use RDF/XML.

Tool support for RDF/XML is better than for N3 or other formats. There  
is more data available in RDF/XML. It is an official W3C standard.  
Those are the good things.

In every other regard, RDF/XML is a complete and utter train wreck.  
Adding named graph support to RDF/XML would be polishing a turd.

Best,
Richard



>
>
> Chris Richard
>
>
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:05 AM, Steffen Staab <staab@uni-koblenz.de> wrote:
>>
>> Find here some uses (reports and software) described for explicit  
>> graph
>> names:
>>
>> 1. Networked graphs providing (possibly recursive) views on other
>> resources:
>>
>> https://www.uni-koblenz.de/FB4/Institutes/IFI/AGStaab/Research/NetworkedGraphs
>>
>> 2. Querying for meta knowledge (provenance, certainty, source  
>> document,
>> etc.),
>>   which is stated about a graph as a whole (yes, "IRI1 a Graph" would
>> be useful here):
>>
>> https://www.uni-koblenz.de/FB4/Institutes/IFI/AGStaab/Research/MetaKnowledge
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Steffen
>>
>> Peter Ansell schrieb:
>>
>>> Just skimming through that submission it is unclear why one would  
>>> want
>>> to publish a document which included sources from multiple different
>>> graphs interweaved. Is this document an authoritative reference for
>>> the triples from each of the graphs? Could you definitely retrieve  
>>> the
>>> graph source from its original definition and match the definitions?
>>> Duplicating information seems to lend itself to hazards with  
>>> importing
>>> two graphs into the same store...
>>>
>>> It would however be very helpful if it was your desire to augment  
>>> the
>>> original graph without having the authority to do so.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> On 18/12/2007, Fabien Gandon <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> W3C just published a member submission that may be relevant to this
>>>> discussion:
>>>>
>>>>    RDF/XML Source Declaration
>>>>    Submitted by INRIA on 06 September 2007
>>>>    Published on 17 December 2007
>>>>    http://www.w3.org/Submission/rdfsource/
>>>>
>>>>    Submission
>>>>    http://www.w3.org/Submission/2007/09/
>>>>
>>>>    W3C Staff Comment
>>>>     http://www.w3.org/Submission/2007/09/Comment
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Fabien - http://ns.inria.fr/fabien.gandon/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 15:12:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:19 GMT