- From: Kevin Ford <kefo@3windmills.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 16:40:58 -0500
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, John Walker <john.walker@semaku.com>, Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>
- Cc: public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi David, If by 'publishing' you mean 'from a web service for consumption' then I feel the suggestion to deprecate RDF/XML is an over correction. Of course, it is not too difficult to move between RDF serializations, but if the publishing service provides a variety of serializations, it is likely to increase the usefulness of that service to a consumer. Diminish its role as a pedagogical tool. That's the issue, no? Best, Kevin On 9/3/15 4:11 PM, David Booth wrote: > Hi John, > > I can appreciate the value of RDF/XML for certain processing tasks, and > I'm okay with keeping RDF/XML alive as a *processing* format. My > suggestion to deprecate RDF/XML was intended to apply to its use as a > *publishing* format. > > Thanks, > David Booth > > On 09/03/2015 03:52 PM, John Walker wrote: >> 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 21:41:26 UTC