- From: Reza B'far <reza.bfar@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 09:41:44 -0700
- To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <5F0AF1C0-8E9B-4F6F-B66B-B3784F9ADCFB@oracle.com>
Arnaud - Thanks for clarification. Would you care to address the questions I sent in response to provide clarity? Thanks in advance On Aug 7, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Sorry, I meant "W3C strives" obviously. > -- > Arnaud Le Hors - Co-chair of the LDP WG > > > Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS wrote on 08/07/2012 08:03:56 AM: > > > From: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS > > To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org, > > Date: 08/07/2012 08:12 AM > > Subject: Re: is linked data about RDF or EAV or just structured data? > > > > Hi Reza, > > > > I'm not sure what exactly you'd like to vote on but I'd like to > > remind everyone of a few procedural points: > > > > 1. W3C thrives to build consensus. For that reason, decisions are > > only made by votes as a last resort, which isn't to say that we > > can't have polls to get a feeling of where people stand. > > > > 2. WGs aren't at liberty to redefine their scope. No vote can change > > that other than that of the Advisory Council after due process. > > > > The LDP charter is clear about the fact the Linked Data Platform > > this WG is to define is about RDF, using IBM's submission as the > > starting point. [1] > > > > So, while I find the discussion interesting, I have to say that If > > some of you are interested in defining a higher level type of > > platform that is independent of the RDF data model you should look > > to start a different group. The W3C now provides for Community > > Groups [2] that can be easily started. > > > > Regards. > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/charter > > [2] http://www.w3.org/community/about/#cg > > -- > > Arnaud Le Hors - Co-chair of the LDP WG > > > > > > "Reza B'far" <reza.bfar@oracle.com> wrote on 08/07/2012 07:40:06 AM: > > > > > From: "Reza B'far" <reza.bfar@oracle.com> > > > To: "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>, > > > Cc: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, Kingsley Idehen > > > <kidehen@openlinksw.com> > > > Date: 08/07/2012 07:46 AM > > > Subject: Re: is linked data about RDF or EAV or just structured data? > > > > > > Folks > > > > > > How about we put some of these to vote as individual axioms? So, of > > > the group agrees, I'll send out individual proposals for axioms that > > > will have 1-2 sentences and folks can vote with the traditional +1/-1/0? > > > > > > I think such axioms can give us the proper technical constraints > > > around the use-cases if approved > > > > > > Best > > > > > > On Aug 7, 2012, at 7:30 AM, "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com> wrote: > > > > > > > hello kingsley. > > > > > > > > On 2012-08-07 16:17 , "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > > > >> Modulo RDF re. your comments above, since it isn't a format, a media > > > >> type still boils down to an entity-attribute-value or attribute=value > > > >> structure i.e., 3-tuple or 2-tuple. It just documents the fact in prose > > > >> as part of the mime type. > > > > > > > > i really don' understand how you get to this conclusion. look at the IETF > > > > registry of media types and you'll see an amazingly wide array of all > > > > kinds of models and metamodels people have registered. you find trees, > > > > maybe jeni has even bothered to register her LMNL "overlapping tree" > > > > format, and all kinds of more generalized or more specialized data models. > > > > what brings you to the conclusion that media types are in one ofthese two > > > > simple classes you are listing? the media type world is so much more > > > > colorful than that. > > > > > > > > i guess i'll stop wasting mailing list bandwidth for now, since you're > > > > going to be on vacation and nobody else seems to get engaged in this > > > > debate anyway. i am still failing to see, though, where those assertions > > > > you are making are coming from, and for my personal vocabulary management, > > > > i'll conclude that > > > > > > > > - there is the "Linked Data is based on RDF" perspective which is shared > > > > by most people, then > > > > - there's the "linked data is just data that's linked on the web" > > > > perspective of ashok that i also had for a while, and then > > > > - there's your "Linked Data is not RDF, but EAV" perspective, that is not > > > > something i had heard of before. > > > > > > > > cheers, > > > > > > > > dret. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2012 16:46:00 UTC