Re: ldp-ISSUE-38 (filtering, inlining): filtered representations and inlining [Linked Data Platform core]

On 11/20/12 5:00 AM, Roger Menday wrote:
>>> we're building a service and as such, we cannot expose implementation details. we want to allow and encourage LDP implementation on non-RDF back-ends. so what we can expose is the service surface including the interactions it affords, but assuming that service internals are RDF would go too far.
>> I agree, but I'm curious if we have general agreement on this point
> Ashok,
>
> I suspect that most agree on this point.
> After-all, we (i.e. Fujitsu) have a lot more non-RDF backends than RDF backends .... :)
>
> Roger
>
>> Ashok
>>

The dexterous nature of an entity relationship model endowed with 
machine comprehensible entity relationship semantics ultimately lends 
itself to mapping. We (OpenLink Software) have mapped more than a 100 
different data source and protocol combinations to RDF, over the years.

As per my earlier reference, the shortcut to understanding this reality 
goes back to Peter Chen's 1976 dissertation [1] about the entity 
relationship model. The model that RDF improves upon by adding:

1. machine comprehensible entity relationship semantics
2. use of URIs to denote entities in this model .

Linked Data further enhances this via use of de-referencable URIs. 
TimBL's variant of Linked Data [2] basis this specifically on HTTP URIs.


Links

1. http://bit.ly/YTdz3N -- Peter Chen's dissertation re. using the 
Entity Relationship Model to achieve a unified view of disparate data 
sources
2. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html -- TimBL's webby 
Linked Data meme .

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen