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

On 6/19/13 8:15 AM, Barry Norton wrote:
> 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"?

None of the above.

You help them understand that structured data can be web-like.

You help them understand that web-like structured data can scale to the 
World Wide Web. If they need this then HTTP URIs are a cost-effective 
route.

You help them understand that web-like structured data can also include 
*explicit* entity relationship semantics that enables humans and 
machines do much more with the structured data.

It's a structured data narrative that goes top-down that helps. That's 
the complete opposite of a bottom-up narrative about RDF/XML, RDFa, 
Turtle, JSON-LD etc.. which are about notations for encoding the 
structured data above, when taking the RDF route. Those same notations 
(and others e.g., CSV, OData etc..) can also be applied by those that 
are taking the EAV/CR route. Net effect, everyone ends up dealing with 
web-like structured data as the common base.
>
>
> 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.

I don't think any of us speak for 1000+ individuals. I think that's 
inherently contradictory :-)
>
>  Barry
>
>
>
>
>


-- 

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