W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2002

RE: Why is RDF such a tough sell?

From: Narahari, Sateesh <Sateesh_Narahari@jdedwards.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:40:29 -0600
Message-ID: <C5E6B2ABE291D5119A3800508B9553A507F5E6A6@cormails8.jdedwards.com>
To: "'Sampo Syreeni'" <decoy@iki.fi>, MDaconta@aol.com
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org


> 
> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 MDaconta@aol.com wrote:
> 
> >I must be missing something.  We talk about "plug in" 
> vocabularies -- I
> >assume via RDFS.  So what is the difference between needing 
> to know 1000
> >RDFS vocabularies to do anything useful and knowing 1000 XML Schema
> >vocabularies?
> 
> The point is, middleware apps (like syndiaction) do not need 
> to know much.
> However, they do need to be able to deal with data in a 
> unified fashion,
> and perhaps understand the data just as far as it takes to 
> filter it. RDF
> facilitates that, XSchema doesn't.

Why not?. Elaborate on it please...can you give some concrete examples?

 
> >I would love to see a sample program that does something 
> useful without
> >knowing a vocabulary beyond what RDF provides.
> 
> How about the fairly simple N3 ruleset which filters anything 
> except RSS
> out of a stream of RDF? Highly useful, if a syndication 
> client wants RSS
> only. Considerably more difficult to implement in an 
> environment where all
> we see are (arbitrarily mixed, via Namespaces) XSchemas.

What about a simple XSLT filter which filters out all documents which do not
belong to a given namespace?.

> Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:decoy@iki.fi, tel:+358-50-5756111
> student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
> openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
> 
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2002 18:31:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:54 GMT