Re: Official response to RDF-ISSUE-132: JSON-LD/RDF Alignment

On 6/8/13 3:07 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>> And the second paragraph explicitly says: "for data they links  between
>> >arbitrary things described by RDF".  I don't know how he could have
>> >said it more clearly.
> So maybe what he wanted to say after all was that people where using RDF
> incorrectly?:-P
>
>
Your are very very perceptive. Guess what?  You are spot on!

Around the time that Linked Data took off, it was clear RDF was being 
misused. The issue was that the IRIs didn't de-reference and the 
fallibility of that (in the context of a Giant Global Graph of Linked 
Data) wasn't clear since RDF was utterly mangled by RDF/XML. In those 
pre Linked Data times, It was basically RDF/XML or you weren't RDF 
compatible and as a consequence not adhering to the Semantic Web vision 
etc..

All you have to do is look at the archives from SWEO and the Linked Open 
Data projects to see what actually happened. Following the success of 
the Linked Data bootstrap, RDF was retrospectively inserted into TimBL's 
meme for the wrong reasons and it simply reinserted the usual RDF 
distractions a consequence.

Companies actually rename themselves when they encounter a fraction of 
the negative press of RDF. Luckily, we were able to use Linked Data via 
DBpedia and the LOD Cloud to demonstrate what's possible without placing 
RDF at the front door. DBpedia and the LOD cloud are not examples of RDF 
usefulness (at first blush) they are seen as examples of what Linked 
Data is all about.

Linked Data saved the Semantic Web vision. RDF nearly destroyed it!

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen