Re: Please publish Turtle or JSON-LD instead of RDF/XML [was Re: Recommendation for transformation of RDF/XML to JSON-LD in a web browser?]

Hi Martynas,

Indeed abandoning XML based serialisations would be foolish IMHO.

Both RDF/XML and TriX can be extremely useful in certain circumstances.

John

On 3 Sep 2015, at 19:53, Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org> wrote:

> With due respect, I think it would be foolish to burn the bridges to
> XML. The XML standards and infrastructure are very well developed,
> much more so than JSON-LD's. We use XSLT extensively on RDF/XML.
> 
> Martynas
> graphityhq.com
> 
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:03 PM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
>> Side note: RDF/XML was the first RDF serialization standardized, over 15
>> years ago, at a time when XML was all the buzz. Since then other
>> serializations have been standardized that are far more human friendly to
>> read and write, and easier for programmers to use, such as Turtle and
>> JSON-LD.
>> 
>> However, even beyond ease of use, one of the biggest problems with RDF/XML
>> that I and others have seen over the years is that it misleads people into
>> thinking that RDF is a dialect of XML, and it is not.  I'm sure this
>> misconception was reinforced by the unfortunate depiction of XML in the
>> foundation of the (now infamous) semantic web layer cake of 2001, which in
>> hindsight is just plain wrong:
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/09/06-ecdl/slide17-0.html
>> (Admittedly JSON-LD may run a similar risk, but I think that risk is
>> mitigated now by the fact that RDF is already more established in its own
>> right.)
>> 
>> I encourage all RDF publishers to use one of the other standard RDF formats
>> such as Turtle or JSON-LD.  All commonly used RDF tools now support Turtle,
>> and many or most already support JSON-LD.
>> 
>> RDF/XML is not officially deprecated, but I personally hope that in the next
>> round of RDF updates, we will quietly thank RDF/XML for its faithful service
>> and mark it as deprecated.
>> 
>> David Booth
>> 
> 

Received on Thursday, 3 September 2015 19:53:22 UTC