Re: Dons flame resistant (3 hours) interface about Linked Data URIs

Steve is right.

If I am not wrong, when TBL gave his talk at CERN for the 20th aniversary of
the web, he said that he was amazed that people were hacking HTML by hand.
He never expected it.

Now... we are the geeks doing RDF, conneg, linked data by hand... In a
couple of years we will create tools for the non-geeks

We have to learn from our history and not get ahead of ourselves.

At the meantime, you, me, all of us.. should learn from history,
therefore...  start creating the Frontpage for RDF and linked data. You will
be bought by Microsoft and become rich!

Juan Sequeda, Ph.D Student
Dept. of Computer Sciences
The University of Texas at Austin
www.juansequeda.com
www.semanticwebaustin.org


On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>wrote:

> On 10 Jul 2009, at 10:56, Richard Light wrote:
>
>> In message <7544285B-E1B1-48A4-96E0-BDED62175EA8@garlik.com>, Steve
>> Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com> writes
>>
>>> On 10 Jul 2009, at 01:22, Hugh Glaser wrote:
>>>
>>>> If I can't simply publish some RDF about something like my dog, by
>>>> publishing a file of triples that say what I want at my standard web
>>>> site,
>>>> we have broken the system.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I couldn't agree more.
>>>
>>> <rant subject="off-topic syntax rant of the decade">
>>> Personally I think that RDF/XML doesn't help, it's too hard to write by
>>> hand. None of the other syntaxes for RDF triples really have the stamp of
>>> legitimacy. I think that's something that could really help adoption, the
>>> the same way that strict XHTML, in the early 1990's wouldn't have been so
>>> popular with people (like me) who just wanted to bash out some text in vi.
>>> </>
>>>
>>
>> Well, in my view, when we get to "bashing out" triples it isn't the
>> holding syntax which will be the main challenge, it's the Linked Data URLs.
>> Obviously, in a Linked Data resource about your dog, you can invent the URL
>> for the subject of your triples, but if your Data is to be Linked in any
>> meaningful way, you also need URLs for their predicates and objects.
>>
>> This implies that, without a sort of Semantic FrontPage (TM) with powerful
>> and user-friendly lookup facilities, no-one is going to bash out usable
>> Linked Data.  Certainly not with vi.  And if you have such authoring
>> software, the easiest part of its job will be rendering your statements into
>> as many syntaxes as you want.
>>
>
> I think that's a fallacy. I the web wasn't bootstrapped by people wielding
> Frontpage*. It was people like Hugh and I, churning out HTML by hand (or
> shell script often), mostly by “cargo cult” copying existing HTML we found
> on the Web. That neatly sidesteps the schema question, as people will just
> use whatever other people use, warts, typos, and all.
>
> The tools for non-geeks phase comes along much later, IMHO. First we have
> to make an environment interesting enough for non-geeks to want to play in.
>
> Happy to be demonstrated wrong of course.
>
> - Steve
>
> * Frontpage wasn't released until late '95, and wasn't widely known until
> late '96 when it was bought by MS. By which time the Web was a done deal.
>
>
> --
> Steve Harris
> Garlik Limited, 2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
> +44(0)20 8973 2465  http://www.garlik.com/
> Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
> Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
>
>
>