Re: 返: Proof: Linked Data does not require RDF

On 6/18/13 2:03 AM, David Booth wrote:
> On 06/18/2013 01:42 AM, エリクソン トーレ wrote:
>> One could argue that these examples, while not being RDF, still
>> adhere to the RDF abstract syntax (triples describing typed directed
>> relationships between resource).
> But that's what RDF *is* -- the abstract syntax.  RDF is syntax 
> independent. 
Not only is it syntax independent, it's devoid of genealogy too :-)

You are turning RDF's meaning away from "Resource Description Framework" 
to "Reality Distortion Field". Luckily, I believe only a minority of 
folks hold the distorted views you continue to espouse in this debate.



Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web:
Personal Weblog:
Twitter/ handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile:
LinkedIn Profile:

Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2013 12:15:29 UTC