Re: Hydra Status

November 16 2016 9:14 PM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote: 
> On 15 Nov 2016 at 23:28, Graham Conzett wrote:
> 
>> After this discussion I'm even less clear on who the intended audience
>> is for Hydra is. Only people who are primarily focused on RDF?
> 
> We want to build something which is usable by everyone.. also people without RDF background. But
> people working on the design of Hydra itself need to be familiar with (or willing to learn the
> basics of) RDF and other technologies Hydra is based on. Otherwise experience has shown that
> constructive discussions are very difficult.

I don't think it's the complete picture. IMO some of the discussions went into too much detail and tried to solve too distant problems. Not a problem with RDF itself, but maybe with the Semantic Web mindset. I know that we all would love to create a better Web but it has to come one step at a time.

> 
> This doesn't mean people without background in those technologies and without time to learn them
> can't participate. We will need input, use cases, feedback etc. People without RDF background are
> crucial to ensure we built something approachable to everyone and eventually document it in an
> accessible manner.
> 

My point exactly. We need RDF knowledge to define Hydra and implement the tooling. But Hydra is for everyone. And the input of those not intimate with RDF is most valuable.

Received on Thursday, 17 November 2016 09:46:57 UTC