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

On 19/06/2013 13:06, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> The answers matter because the collective goal is getting more 
> end-users and developers on board, without being overbearing and 
> draconian. Basically, end-users and developers fall into the following 
> camps:
>
> 1. completely new to all the technical elements -- that includes the 
> Web's technical architecture
>

Are they helped by saying "there's RDF/XML, RDFa, Turtle, JSON-LD though 
you can use what you want... but we've no tools to help you unless your 
stuff becomes RDF"?

> 2. Web 2.0 developers and users -- this is where R-D-F reflux is 
> strong for a myriad of reasons (due to bottom-up narratives that are 
> provincial, conflation laden, and recited like mantras)

Are they helped by saying (the above)

>
> 3. experienced applications & systems developers, systems integrators, 
> and users -- the folks with 10 - 20+ years of expertise covering 
> development, implementation, and use of operating systems, DBMS, and 
> business applications (these folks understand data structures, data 
> access by references, pointers, relations etc..).

Are they helped by going beyond the analogy (and let's face it, RDF is 
like EAV/CR, but it's not how people use that technology), and saying 
"use what you want... but it won't work with anything else without 
making RDF"?


I'm all for an architectural/philosophical consideration of what Linked 
Data is, but I don't think we're being sensitive to what the 1000+ 
subscribers of this list are mainly looking for, which is best practice 
and working technology in my opinion.

  Barry

Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 12:16:03 UTC