Re: Fwd: The need for RDF in Linked Data

[Oops!  I just noticed this stuck in my out box]

On 06/17/2013 08:07 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 6/17/13 1:35 AM, David Booth wrote:
>>
>> If the term Linked Data is "hijacked" by a broader population
>> to mean *any* sort of data that is linked -- not necessarily
>> RDF -- then this will be a major loss to the Semantic Web
>> community, because it is very hard to come up with simple ways
>> to communicate the essence of the Semantic Web.  The Linked
>> Data meme has been extremely helpful.  If the RDF component
>> is lost, we will have lost the best meme we have ever had for
>> explaining the Semantic Web.`
> David,
>
> It's possible to debate a matter without unnecessary use of inflammatory
> language. I would happily debate you any day about this subject matter,
> but I struggle with your choice of words.

I sincerely apologize if it sounded inflammatory, as it was not intended 
that way.  it was intended to be accurately descriptive of how it feels.

>
> Have you considered that "hijacked" is utterly unnecessary in this
> debate? Irrespective of who might be right or wrong, nobody is trying to
> hijack anything.

I chose that word because it accurately describes how it feels to have 
such an important meme taken away by having its meaning altered in such 
a critical way.

> Put differently, can you make a convincing case against
> that fact that by inserting RDF -- in immutable form -- into the Linked
> Data conversation (retrospectively) it could also be perceived by some
> as hijacking?

Yes.  That is why I put the word in quotes: to acknowledge that that is 
one perspective, and others with a different perspective may look at it 
differently.  apparently I should have pushed in a more explicit 
disclaimer such as: ". . . at least, that is how it *feels*".

>
> If you recall, your fundamental thesis is predicated on the notion that
> it took TimBL 3 years (between 2006 and 2009) to realize that he was
> inarticulate about RDF in all his prior Linked Data related memes.

No, it is not.  Again, my thesis is: (a) "Linked Data" is a term of art, 
in the Semantic Web community, that implies the use of RDF; and (b) the 
loss of that term as a term of art (by altering its meaning in a 
critical way) would be harmful to the goals of the Semantic Web.

David

Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2013 13:53:45 UTC