W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > January 2001

Re: From RDF expectations and experiences to requirements?!

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:35:29 -0000
Message-ID: <011901c08ba3$efed2480$05e393c3@z5n9x1>
To: "Wolfram Conen" <conen@wi-inf.uni-essen.de>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> What problems did you/do you see that require an RDF-like solution?

Anything that needs metadata... one good example use is EDL/EARL [1]. And
then there's for use in the Semantic Web...

> Have you been able to use RDF to solve the problems?

Well, yes. If there is a problem that requires an RDF-like solution, why
not use RDF? The M&S spec. isn't all that complicated, so it is very easy
to implement, and there are quite a few parsers and APIs out there. One
good use was in the SWAG Vocabulary where I used CWM to find out who coined
which terms - that really brought home the power of semantics to me.

> What are the key features of RDF that you like?  Are there features you
> don't like? What is missing (and why?)

I like it's simplicity: node and arc, and another node. Subject, predicate,
object. Its power lies in its simplicity at the basic level. Of course,
ontologies and logic should have been built into it in complementary
specifications... as part of a suite of RDF.

> [Evolution]
> RDF2.0?

At first I didn't think there would be much need for an RDF 2.0, but N3
really opened my eyes. I simply don't write anything in XML RDF now unless
I need to process it as such. Seth's semEnglish also has great potential. I
think RDF 2.0, as there surely needs to be one, should be much better
defined for a start: how big is the 1.0 errata now?, and should have more
key features. Ontologies, and perhaps even logic should come as part of the
package... but modular of course. But the main thing is scribblability and
ease of use. It's too rigid at the moment.

> Will RDF play a key role in the upcoming "Semantic Web"?

Of course! The whole Semantic Web is based on triples at the base level -
have you seen TimBL's architecture diagrams? But of course, this isn't
limited to XML RDF, or even N3. It's limited to *RDF* which is the basic
assertion model. Anything like that as long as you can build the more
complex SW stuff on top of it - Schemas, Ontologies, Logic, etc.

[1] EDL/EARL: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/#earl and
http://infomesh.net/edl/

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
[ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2001 11:37:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:47 GMT