Re: Hydra Design Goals: How important is RDF?

Hi Asbjorn,

For me _it is_ a core value as it allows me to
tick off the REST stipulation for self-descriptive messages.
The RDF backing is superior to media types in my opinion.

I have described this (among other advantages) in this presentation in 
more detail:

https://github.com/vanthome/rest-api-essay-presentation

BG, Thomas

Am 01.10.2015 um 10:32 schrieb Asbjørn Ulsberg:
> As with JSON-LD, I feel the RDF part of Hydra is both
> under-communicated and more of a nice-to-have than the core value of
> the technologies. I think this is a good thing. While RDF and the
> Semantic Web is awesome in its prospects, I highly doubt most people
> getting their hands dirty with JSON-LD or Hydra will have a Semantic
> Web perspective or problems related to RDF to solve.
>
> Related and relevant: "JSON-LD and Why I Hate the Semantic Web"
> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/json-ld-origins-2/
>
> I expect JSON-LD to be used as a way to express URIs and hypermedia in
> JSON and I expect Hydra to be used as "The WSDL of HTTP / REST".
> Please arrest me if I'm wrong in these assumptions.
>
> Because of this, I think it's important to state this nice-to-have
> status of RDF as a design goal, since from what I've gathered so far
> from the discussions on this list, this isn't necessarily something
> everyone is in agreement with. People who are deeply intimate with RDF
> will of course have a very different perspective on the value of not
> needing to know RDF to think a piece of technology (that is built on
> top of RDF, nonetheless) is useful or not.
>
> So: How important is RDF and the Semantic Web as a design goal for
> Hydra? Should it be made more explicit?
>