W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2003

Re: Asunto: Re: Why Rdf?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:30:50 -0500 (EST)
To: frozados@fibertel.com.ar
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0311242025440.1497@homer.w3.org>

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 frozados@fibertel.com.ar wrote:

>Charles, i underestand what you are sawing. But, i see that i could do the
>same if i have tables and each relationships. If i have to make a foaf relationship,
>i can have 2 tables, and one column of one table "says" if that field is
>a friend-of-someone or a subclass or another property.

This is true. But if you use RDF, you don't have to change any tables when
you add some more relationships. You don't have to revalidate your data when
you divide something into a couple of subclasses or subproperties.

>I am doing my master thesis of my University, and i want to underestand
>which are the advantages of using rdf and not other languages with database
>relationships. My doubt comes, because, i read a lot of rdf docs and Jena
>docs, but now, i have to explain why i choose rdf and show a system working
>with rdf.

As a rough example. I took some FOAF tools, and added languages that people
speak, as a way of tracking important information in a legal case. It was
much easier than re-writing a set of XML, since I didn't need to "complete"
it - just add information that I wanted or had.  And it is information in a
form I can use again.

>thanks a lot for your help,
>federico.
>p.d: sorry for my english, is not perfect.

No worries. Mi espaņol tampoco es el mejor. Seriously, there is a Wiki page
about the Semantic Web in Spanish - http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemWebSpain -
that might be a good place for tracking ideas.
Received on Monday, 24 November 2003 20:31:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:03 GMT