- From: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 20:51:25 -0500
- To: "Ora.Lassila@nokia.com" <Ora.Lassila@nokia.com>
- Cc: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMVTWDw9H3wtwEOOeckzM0SBRXhi4f3ouf-4_c5vPOHPu3Aisw@mail.gmail.com>
Amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can you do linked data without RDF? Yes. Can you do linked data with RDF? Yes. End of discussion... please! :) On Friday, June 21, 2013, wrote: > existing thread, and also for probably saying things other folks have > already brought up] > > I have worked on RDF and systems using RDF for over 15 years now (and on > RDF's "non-Web" predecessors before that). The most important thing I have > learned is that while it is possible to do Linked Data and Semantic Web > stuff *without* RDF, whatever alternative technology you choose, you soon > feel compelled to add features that make it look like RDF. I particularly > see this whenever someone comes to me advocating the use of JSON. RDF is > what it is for a reason, *not* because we arbitrarily threw something > together. > > So it is not that RDF "looks bad" or whatever people might be saying. It > is that other technologies and approaches "fall short" of what Linked Data > and Semantic Web really need. Let's not please reinvent things or shove a > round peg in a square hole just because someone prefers curly braces over > angle brackets. Issues like that are not interesting (at all), and we have > more important things to do. > > Regards, > > - Ora > > -- > Dr. Ora Lassila ora.lassila@nokia.com <javascript:;> > http://www.lassila.org > Principal Technologist, Nokia > > > > -- Juan Sequeda +1-575-SEQ-UEDA www.juansequeda.com
Received on Saturday, 22 June 2013 01:51:52 UTC