Re: What Does Point Number 3 of TimBL's Linked Data Mean?

On Jun 25, 2013, at 12:19 AM, David Booth wrote:

> The problem is that some people are claiming that RDF is not a *necessary* component of Linked Data. 

Let me try this --

Is *SPARQL* a *necessary* component of Linked Data?

In other words, must I put up a SPARQL processor/server, in 
order to put some Linked Data on the Web?

If not, if SPARQL is indeed optional, then why is RDF (which
is not raised above SPARQL in the TimBL scripture currently 
being pointed to) mandatory?


A: Yes.            
| Q: Are you sure?
| | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
| | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Ted Thibodeau, Jr.           //               voice +1-781-273-0900 x32
Senior Support & Evangelism  //
OpenLink Software, Inc.      //    
         10 Burlington Mall Road, Suite 265, Burlington MA 01803
     Weblog   --
     LinkedIn --
     Twitter  --
     Google+  --
     Facebook --
Universal Data Access, Integration, and Management Technology Providers

Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2013 15:14:28 UTC