- From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:22:30 -0400
- To: <danbri@danbri.org>
- CC: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> Subject: Re: What *is* RDF? Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 03:41:16 -0500 > Hi Peter, > > On 25 March 2011 17:49, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider > <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote: > >> Well, I just whipped up the following, which I think is a first cut at >> what I might give to a knowledgable CS person (whether this group covers >> enough web developers is a different question, of course). Of course, >> it is a lot longer that Richard's charaterisation of JSON, but this is >> only to be expected. >> >> peter >> >> What is RDF(S)? >> >> RDF(S) (Resource Desription Framework (Schema)) is a logic [but don't be >> scared by this] (and data model) for representing information on the >> Web. >> >> RDF(S) uses RDF graphs to represent information. An RDF graph is a set >> of facts or RDF triples, each of which has a subject, a predicate, and >> an object. > > [...] [snip] > > Thanks, this is quite a refreshing read :) It's not quite "stick it on > a t-shirt" material but is in a way a manifesto for RDF's underlying > simplicity. > > I'd suggest one tweak, "An RDF graph is a set of *facts*" seems rather > idealistic (in the nicest way). It suggests each triple can be > (usefully) interpreted as a true statement about the world. Lots of > RDF data is just plain wrong, out of date, malicious > (over-enthusiastic SEO) or by some design capturing non-current > worldview - logs, archives, etc. The original RDF specs talked about > statements. I've tended to use 'claims' more recently but maybe that > brings the notion of "who is the claimer here?" prematurely into the > foreground. RDF documents that contain falsehoods are presumably > somehow "still RDF", and can be managed using the same tool chain - > eg. consulted in SPARQL databases. > > "... uses RDF graps to represent factual information" is a tiny bit > softer; I think people would intuitively accept the notion that not > every fragment of "factual information" must always be correct. And > then maybe, "... is a set of statements or RDF triples, each of > which...". > > cheers, > > Dan My experience in the US is that there are a lot of false facts readily available for public consumption and there is no general distinction made between true facts and false facts. However, "fact"->"statement" seems like a good change. I don't know if I would use "factual information", maybe that is the role of RDF graps. peter
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2011 12:23:16 UTC