Re: Response draft for Jan Wielemaker JR8-2/54

I am happy to see I generated some storm here, so I am not 100% sure
what changes should happen on the response to Jan... There seem to be no
consensus...

I will call it a day. Maybe by the time I am back tomorrow everything
will be solved...:-)


Ivan

Bijan Parsia wrote:
> On 10 Mar 2009, at 15:41, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> [snip]
>> I don't think that's the relevant claim.   I read Jan's comment to say:
>>
>>     If OWL 2 has a serialization which is XML-Schema-friendly, it should
>>     use some general solution for making such serializations, not
>>     something which is specific to OWL 2.
> 
> Well, I read your email to say, "Oh yes, Bijan, I think you are 100%
> right on GRDDL and I'll fight on your side to the death."
> 
> Ok, that's a *little* more extreme, but it's pretty hard to see where
> your reading is coming from :)
> 
>> Now there are two different kinds of schema-friendliness.  There is the
>> TriX style, where the schema checks that you have triples, but doesn't
>> care what the triples are.
> 
> And would be the most likely thing to be picked up for standardization,
> at the moment.
> 
>>   I don't find this very interesting or
>> useful; it certainly doesn't meet Bijan's needs.
> 
> INDEED.
> 
>> I suspect it's not
>> what Jan is talking about.
>>
>> So the interesting/useful kind of schema-friendliness is where the XML
>> schema makes sure the right sort of triples are present, in the right
>> graph shapes.  That's the kind of schema-friendliness OWL/XML and Rigid
>> RDF offer.
> 
> Huh? The kind of schema-friendliness really has nothing to do with
> triples, it has to do with making the relevant structures salient to an
> XML Schema like schema language and type system.
> 
>> The paragraph I'd like to eliminate seems to argue against the first
>> kind of schema-friendliness, which I don't think anyone is actually
>> advocating.  Worse, it suggests that because this first kind of
>> friendliness is painful, all kind of generalized schema-friendliness are
>> painful.
> 
> The only demonstrated version of the second I've seen was RSS 1.0. And
> it didn't really work there either.
> 
> Current practice is to convert. E.g., GRDDL.
> 
> If you want to demonstrate an alternative, then do so. In my experience,
> TriX or TurtleXML is much more the standard notion and thus much more
> likely what Jan is meaning, to the degree he has anything specific in mind.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
> 
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf