W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > June 2013

Re: An IRC discussion with Alexandre Bertails re SSUE-19:

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 16:19:53 -0400
Message-ID: <51AF9D69.6000804@openlinksw.com>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On 6/5/13 3:08 PM, Alexandre Bertails wrote:
> On 06/05/2013 02:36 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 6/5/13 2:26 PM, Alexandre Bertails wrote:
>>> On 06/05/2013 02:05 PM, Henry Story wrote:
>>>> Well, I just proved it from basic principles. You can decide not to
>>>> be convinced, but that is beyond the reaches of reason then. If you
>>>> explained what did not convince you then one could progress.
>>> Henry, I just wanted to make clear that I didn't agree that you proved
>>> anything. The same questions remain: text/turtle does not tell you
>>> that you can infer the interaction with a resource by looking at its
>>> RDF type.
>> Do you agree that RDF based Linked Data principles (TimBL's meme)
> We're defining LDP, a concrete specification, with a formal process
> and a group of people. So with all respect to TimBL, I don't care
> about the meme you're talking about.


I am trying to have a civil conversation with you. I made reference to 
TimBL's meme in an attempt to establish a reference point. For the 
record (one more time) I don't even agree with TimBL's revised Linked 
Data meme, in short, it's actually one of the sources of all of this 
confusion. I told him that years ago and will tell him that until the 
end of time until its revised.

The original meme penned by TimBL made no mention of RDF or SPARQL. If 
that meme had stayed intact it would have cut this (and many others) 
down, substantially [1].  And by the way, Roy is also a narrative 
confusion vector too [2], the whole "Everything is a Resource" meme is 
broken, because the ability to sense is affected by projection medium, 
so you can't simply make that blanket claim and wonder why those that 
believe that world view are eternally confused (note to the RESTafari !).

The problem with RDF is conflation. It's so conflated that its eternally 
difficult to reorient reasonable folks back to its fundamental essence.

Back to the point at hand here:

You can throw both "RDF" and "Linked Data" out of the window and still 
triangulate a coherent conversation about the Web itself and AWWW.

The World Wide Web has been based on an entity relationship graph from 
day one. Here's why: Links denote Relations [3].

Every thing we sense on the the Web is the product of Relations, 
Relation Subjects, and Relations Objects. All of the aforementioned are 
denoted using HTTP URIs.

Today, we are simply evolving the types of Entities that comprise Web 
Relations. In the beginning all the Entities were of Type: Web Document. 
Now we have Entities of type: Any (or in OWL parlance owl:Thing).

The LDP question:

Again, and I raised this eons ago, what does this effort mean when it 

1. RDF compliance?
2. Linked Data compliance?
3. Turtle as the MUST support Media Type?

Believe me, I don't participate in these threads for lack of better 
things to do with my time. I've just been around the Data block a few 
times over the last 20+ years and I recognize trouble when I see it. 
Worst of all, artificial trouble that arises when the fundamental 
narrative is garbled.

Note: I warned this group about this matter and it was simply pushed 
aside. If it weren't for the fact that I understand what Henry is trying 
to get the majority to digest, I would actually be dead silent at this 


1. http://twitpic.com/5m2lu5/full -- TimBL espousing opaque URIs (note: 
URIs are the key to this game, that's the genius of the Web, not Resources!)

2. http://twitpic.com/5m2pp9/full -- Roy espousing hackable-urls (well 
that doesn't really work, it assumes Relations where Entities are all of 
Type: Document or Information Object or Web Resource) which ultimately 
is broken since in reality "everything is a resource" doesn't cut it re. 
clarity etc..

3. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988#section-3 - Web Linking (a spec 
that clearly describes what Links denote).

>> imply
>> that the URIs in a Turtle doc denote entities such that when
>> de-referenced you end up with a description of the URI's referent? Let's
>> at least cross or not cross this bridge, as a first step.
> You guys keep talking about description/presentation. That's not the
> question as we have already all agreed on using RDF to expose the LDP
> model. The question is to know what HTTP interactions are allowed with
> RDF resources found in a text/turtle document.
> You act as if RDF was equivalent to a media type when it comes to HTTP
> interactions (again, not just the trivial ones like GET). But RDF is
> just a data model. It does not define a REST API.
> Alexandre.
>> Kingsley
>>> Alexandre.
>>>> Social Web Architect
>>>> http://bblfish.net/



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

Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 20:20:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:51 UTC