- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 11:00:05 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 25/04/12 19:44, Sandro Hawke wrote: ... > On the other hand, please consider my point: sometimes we can't know > whether a design will work until trying it in a fairly big arena, with a > lot of attention. As I understand the history, XML was designed by a > W3C Working Group. Has it succeeded? Yes, sort of. Has it failed? > Yes, sort of, mostly when it was applied in areas not anticipated by the > WG (like for serializing data). > > Yes, we probably only get one shot with a W3C Recommendation for this, > so we don't want to get it wrong. But the Named Graphs paper was seven > years ago. I don't think sitting back and waiting for more research to > happen is a great strategy, either. This is a strong argument for a two strand approach: 1/ Standardize the minimal, safe ideas (tested) 2/ Layer on top the new ideas to enable usages not currently happening (for testing). If (2) doesn't work out, we have at least helped by standardizing low-level details and so (low-level) software will be compatible. Boring but a step forward. Andy
Received on Friday, 27 April 2012 10:00:52 UTC