Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

Dan Brickley wrote:
> (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.
>
>   
I am basically saying: N3 representation of graphs lead to the Linked 
Data explosion.
> 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.
>   

Not in my experience.

**critical correction: I should have stated N-Triples instead of N3 re. 
base representation format at the foundation re. DBpedia **


The sequence went something like this.

TimBL Design Issues Note. and SPARQL emergence. Before that, RDF was 
simply in the dark ages.

DBpedia project (which produced and still produces N-Triples dumps).

Cool URIs and Linked Data Deployment/Pubishin guides that added initial 
incorporation of HTML descriptor pages into the mix while relegating 
RDF/XM to a negotiable representation option.

Basically, without DBpedia there wouldn't be today's burgeoning Web of 
Linked Data (what the world has come to sorta understand and started 
using across many frontiers).


IMHO. As I see it, RDF/XML is a course/blessing. Without RDF/XML 
sponging (so called "rdfization")  wouldn't have been possible on the 
scale we've achieve, many transformations would become more painful 
etc.. (Blessing side). On the other hand putting RDF/XML in front of 
people esp., those outside the core semweb community that assume RDF/XML 
== RDF (broader framework comprised of markup and data model) when 
talking about Graph Models is an unfortunate curse.
> 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  ...
>   
Education leads to boostrap. N3 and Turtle are very good in this regard.

Seeing the Triple is the key to comprehending what this whole thing is 
about. I am sure my first few comments on SWEO echoed this fundamental 
sentiment a few years back.

RDF/XML has always made the triple difficult to discern via human eyes 
(esp. the RDF newbie variety). 

Making HTML based presentations (a Chris Bizer & Richard Cyganiak 
obsession at the time) of RDF based resource descriptions, as 
exemplified by DBpedia is how the Web of Linked Data reached its bootstrap.

RDF/XML relegation to machine/program usage (e.g. the stuff we did/do 
with our sponger cartridges) was crucial.

> 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.
>   

To be more precise, my view is that the Linked Data bootstrap occurred 
modulo RDF/XML at the front door :-)

Ironically, HTML (those green DBpedia pages) played the most important 
role of all. It allowed people to understand Linked Data via 
conventional Web usage patterns i.e. put a link in the address bar and 
then have something presented to you that made sense.

RDFa impact albeit very significant is a very recent occurrence in the 
grand scheme of things re. Linked Data bootstrap (left most segment of 
the adoption curve). Of course, RDFa is certainly vital to crossing 
current and future adoption chasms as we continue to move from left to 
right along the tech adoption curve.

> cheers,
>
> Dan
>
> [*] http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Syntax.html
>
>   


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen

Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 19:02:52 UTC