- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:06:24 -0400
- To: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51C190B0.4020702@openlinksw.com>
On 6/19/13 4:34 AM, Luca Matteis wrote: > > To me "In normal usage within the Semantic Web community, does the > term "Linked Data" imply the use of RDF?" is a well designed question > that exposes the *evidence* about whether the term Linked Data implies > RDF. This is the entire subject of our current debate. It isn't, that's the problem. Put differently, nobody is disputing the fact that in the Semantic Web community RDF is associated with Linked Data. Even the more extreme fact that they are inextricably bound or tightly coupled. The issues at hand are as follows: 1. Is RDF the only option for producing Linked Data that's 100% compliant with TimBL's original meme? 2. Are RDF and Linked Data tightly or loosely coupled? Links: 1. http://bit.ly/16EVFVG -- Venn diagram illustrating how Identifiers (URIs), Structured Data (Linked Data), and RDF (Predicate Logic) are related 2. http://kingsley.idehen.net/DAV/home/kidehen/Public/DropBox/Public/Linked%20Data%20Resources/linked-data-rdf-test.ttl -- what makes this uniquely RDF? -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 11:06:52 UTC