Re: linked open data and PDF

On 2/3/15 11:39 AM, Sarven Capadisli wrote:
> On 2015-01-30 16:48, Larry Masinter wrote:
>>>   There are a number of issues
>>> and shortcomings with the PDF approach which in the end will not play
>>> well with the Web is intended to be, nor how it functions.
>>
>> I think I have familiarity with what the Web is intended to
>> be, and how it functions, and I disagree.
>>
>> One of the earliest advances of the web (from Tim's
>> original HTML-only design) was the introduction of
>> support for multiple formats, including image and
>> document representations.  It would greatly
>> improve the open data initiative to not restrict LD
>> to HTML.
>
> No one is restricting LD to HTML. Evidently, that is not the case, nor 
> should it be that way. FYI, RDF serializations lead the way in LD. 
> But, for the human/end-user, all roads almost always lead to HTML.
>
> The multiple formats are indeed supported, but their mileage varies on 
> how we get a hold of them. We have HTML which tries to address their 
> accessibility and discoverability. It is clear that PDFs are 
> data-silos since we do not hop from one (binary document) to another. 
> While linking is possible, at the end of the day, there is a UX 
> problem. There is no ubiquitous experience which allows one to switch 
> between PDF and HTML resources in a given device, operating-system, 
> and software (e.g., Web browser, PDF reader). Jumping between them is 
> awkward, and for the sake of what? How or why would that UX be any 
> preferable for the user? Surely, that can be improved; as you well 
> know that Web browsers can display PDFs nowadays. But still, that's 
> just an annoyance (or depending on who you ask, it is a convenience).
>
> Surely, you also know why timbl decided not to use TeX as the language 
> to author and exchange documents on the Web.
>
> I stand by my original point that HTML is a good bet. The burden of 
> proof that PDF is somehow Web or LD "friendly" lies on the shoulders 
> of enthusiasts and stake holders. Make is so.
>
> This is not to discourage any format striving to be more open and 
> machine-friendly on the Web. 

Larry,

Adobe could provide a service that addresses the concerns raised by 
Sarven. The service in question would use content-negotiation to offer 
HTML renditions of PDF docs, for instance. In addition, the HTML in 
question could include structured data islands that use an RDF notation 
to describe data represented in tabular form that's embedded in PDF docs.

I can discuss this further with you (on or offline). There is a 
significant need for such a service, from a business perspective.

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this