Re: use case focus - resending

Just to put a little perspective on the errors in Google’s first version:

Sam Ruby schreef:
> The consequences of "happening now" based on where people "seem to be 
> heading" without "caring about validation" is that people will get 
> things like prefixes wrong:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0064.html 
>

Not that big of a deal, as RDF can be used perfectly fine even without a 
schema as long as you don’t want to do advanced reasoning over it or 
validation. Although of course it should be fixed. In fact, it already 
seems to be fixed.

> And things like namespaces wrong:
>
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-May/019717.html 

Although this hurts the ‘resolvability’ idea of RDF URIs, it won’t break 
the triples themselves nor reasoning over them. Of course it is 
desirable to fix this, and for widespread ontologies it is also likely 
to be fixed quickly as peer review will notice this deficiency early on 
(as is shown in this particular case, mere hours after the announcement).

But even if this error would actually never be fixed and perpetuate, in 
the end it is nothing that owl:sameAs (a.k.a. an alias) can not fix.

So even if this were to remain exactly the way it is now, in the first 
hours after the announcement, it would already provide triples that can 
contribute significantly to the overall space of data.

~Laurens

-- 
Note: New email address! Please update your address book.

~~ Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!! ~~
Laurens Holst, student, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com