- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 20:13:19 +0200
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
(cc: list trimmed to LOD list.) On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > Cut long story short. [-cut-] > We have an EAV graph model, URIs, triples and a variety of data > representation mechanisms. N3 is one of those, and its basically the > foundation that bootstrapped the House of HTTP based Linked Data. I have trouble believing that last point, so hopefully I am misunderstanding your point. Linked data in the public Web was bootstrapped using standard RDF, serialized primarily in RDF/XML, and initially deployed mostly by virtue of people enthusiastically publishing 'FOAF files' in the (RDF)Web. These files, for better or worse, were overwhelmingly in RDF/XML. When TimBL wrote http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html in 2006 he used what is retrospectively known as Notation 2, not its successor Notation 3. "Notation2"[*] was an unstriped XML syntax ( see original in http://web.archive.org/web/20061115043657/http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html ). That DesignIssues note was largely a response to the FOAF deployment. "This linking system was very successful, forming a growing social network, and dominating, in 2006, the linked data available on the web." The LinkedData design note argued that (post RDFCore cleanup and http-range discussions) we could now use URIs for non-Web things, and that this would be easier than dealing with bNode-heavy data. Much of the subsequent successes come from following that advice. Perhaps N3 played an educational role in showing that RDF had other representations; but by then, SPARQL, NTriples etc were also around. As was RDFa, http://xtech06.usefulinc.com/schedule/paper/58 ... I have a hard time seeing N3 as the foundation that bootstrapped things. Most of the substantial linked RDF in Web by 2006 was written in RDF/XML, and by then the substantive issues around linking, reference, aggregation, identification and linking etc were pretty well understood. I don't dislike N3; it was a good technology testbed and gave us the foundation for SPARQL's syntax, and for the Turtle subset. But it's role outside our immediate community has been pretty limited in my experience. cheers, Dan [*] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Syntax.html
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 18:13:57 UTC