- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:51:58 -0400
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <50635CDE.9020808@openlinksw.com>
On 9/26/12 3:20 PM, David Wood wrote: > Hi Arnaud, > > I appreciate your need for marketing simplicity. However, please > consider this: > > RDF used to have one standard format (RDF/XML) which was, as you say, > overly complicated for many potential users. Now we have two standard > formats (RDF/XML and RDFa). Those serve very different communities > (enterprise XML developers and some Web developers). We are now in > the process of defining either two additional standard formats (Turtle > and JSON-LD) or three (if we add TriG). Again, the potential users of > those formats are different, but in each case we can parse the formats > as RDF. > > To my mind, that is a feature, not a bug. We do not need to explain > each format to all users. Instead, we need to figure out which kind > of user is in front of us and tell them about the format that most > closely suits their needs. +1 Kingsley > > Regards, > Dave > > > > > On Sep 26, 2012, at 15:12, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com > <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote: > >> I realize this group is more interested in technical purity than >> marketing and that from a technical point of view using two different >> formats and names can be totally justified but I'd like to ask >> everyone to think about the bigger picture here. >> >> RDF is already plagued with the image of being an overly complicated >> technology and this is hindering its uptake in the industry. We >> really don't want to make things worse by introducing a bunch of new >> formats and names. >> >> In a private email Andy wrote to me: >> >> > A collection of graphs isn't itself a graph. >> > >> > A syntax for a collection of graphs isn't a syntax for a graph. >> >> This certainly makes perfect sense and is very simply put. As an >> engineer I can certainly appreciate the difference but as someone >> interested in helping adoption of RDF in the industry I just don't >> think this is worth introducing a whole new format and name. >> >> Turtle is providing us with something everyone can understand (unlike >> RDF/XML) and the name has been out there for a while now. We should >> try to build on that rather than start confusing things (again) with >> the introduction of multiple formats. >> >> Could we not simply have two different versions of Turtle with a way >> for programs to differentiate the two so that we can still only talk >> about Turtle? >> >> Regards. >> -- >> Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group >> >> >> Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> wrote on >> 09/26/2012 11:18:34 AM: >> >> > From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> >> > To: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com >> <mailto:david@3roundstones.com>>, >> > Cc: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS, W3C RDF WG >> <public-rdf-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-rdf-wg@w3.org>> >> > Date: 09/26/2012 11:19 AM >> > Subject: naming dataset syntax >> > >> > On 09/26/2012 01:58 PM, David Wood wrote: >> > Hi Arnaud, >> > >> > We agreed quite early (Feb 2011) to "use >> http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/ >> > as the starting point for the Turtle work" [1] and in April 2011 to >> > limit syntactic sugar additions to Turtle [2]. >> > >> > IIRC, we had substantial conversations regarding the desirability of >> > turning Turtle into a quad language, but we decided (without >> > resolution) not to do that because: >> > - Turtle is widely fielded already >> > - We wished to minimize disruption, as per our charter >> > - Issues around datasets/quads were (and are) less agreed upon >> > >> > >> > Yes, we agreed to get Turtle out the door as a language for Triples. >> > >> > So, now, what do we call a language that's like Turtle except it can >> > also include datasets (that is, the triples can be segmented into >> > named sections)? >> > >> > Frankly I expect this language to supplant Turtle as soon as it is >> > well supported, as long as it doesn't do anything to exclude simple >> > usage. I think the kind of people who use Turtle (or RDF) are the >> > kind of people who will want to segment and manage their data. But >> > (1) I could be wrong, and (2) it may be a long time before it is >> > well-supported, given how confused we are about it within the WG. >> > >> > So, myself, I'm split about what to call it. Compared to me, >> > however, the WG, tends to lean more toward existing users and >> > experts, over new users and non-experts, so I expect the WG to just >> > go with "trig" unless someone makes a strong case for something else. >> > >> > (In my prototype coding, I called the hypothetical trig-like >> > language "mugl", for MultiGraphLanguage. If we start from a blank >> > slate, we can probably do better than mugl or trig.) >> > >> > -- Sandro >> > >> > >> >> > Regards, >> > Dave >> > >> > [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-02-23#resolution_1 >> > [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/34 >> >> > >> > On Sep 26, 2012, at 12:42, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com >> <mailto:lehors@us.ibm.com>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Sandro, >> > >> > This discussion had already started when I joined the WG and as I >> > caught it midstream I thought it was about extending Turtle. I've >> > since then realized that this wasn't the intent and everybody seems >> > to agree with that but I must admit that I still don't know why. >> > Could you please explain or point me to some reference I could read >> > to catch up on that? >> > >> > I have to say that the proliferation of formats for RDF makes me a >> > bit nervous. This doesn't go along with making RDF simpler for the >> > masses/industry and facilitating adoption. >> > >> > Thanks. >> > -- >> > Arnaud Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group >> > >> > >> > Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> wrote on >> 09/25/2012 04:14:25 PM: >> > >> > > From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> >> > > To: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-rdf-wg@w3.org>>, >> > > Date: 09/25/2012 04:14 PM >> > > Subject: Dataset Syntax - checking for consensus >> > > >> > > I'm not sure how much progress we'll be able to make on dataset >> > > semantics tomorrow, so I thought I'd draft some proposals on dataset >> > > syntax. The chairs can put this on the agenda is they like (but >> it's >> > > too short notice for these decisions to be binding yet). I'm >> thinking >> > > it would be useful to see how close we are to agreement on these >> issues. >> > > >> > > If you followup with votes, please use -1 for Formal Objection, 0 >> for >> > > abstain, +1 for approve. Numbers in between are fine, too. >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: We will produce a W3C Recommendation for a dataset syntax, >> > > similar to TriG and to SPARQL's named graph syntax. >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: We'll request a media-type for this syntax which is >> different >> > > from the media-type for Turtle. (That is, we will not consider this >> > > language to supplant Turtle and take over the name, becoming the new >> > > "Turtle", as was once proposed.) >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: Our dataset syntax will allow for the expression of empty >> > > named graphs, whatever their semantics might be (to be decided). The >> > > syntax is an empty curly-braces expression, as in "<g> { }". >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: Our dataset syntax will have some standard mechanism >> (to be >> > > determined within the next few weeks) through which a Dataset >> > > serialization can include some RDF data about the Dataset (that >> is, some >> > > metadata in the form of an RDF graph). >> > > >> > > >> > > Below, there are groups of proposals which are alternative >> solutions to >> > > a design issue. If you approve of more than one of the >> alternatives, >> > > please vote "+2" for your favorite. >> > > >> > > * Name of the dataset syntax >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: We will call our recommended dataset syntax "trig", >> > > capitalized to Trig as needed. >> > > PROPOSED: We will call our recommended dataset syntax "TriG", but >> > > informally and in the media type, "trig". >> > > PROPOSED: We will call our recommended dataset syntax "TriG", and >> use >> > > that capitalization everywhere. >> > > >> > > * Use of equals sign, like <g> = { <s> <p> <o> } . This is not in >> > > SPARQL but is in traditional TriG, for compatibility with N3. >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, a "=" MAY appear between the >> name and >> > > the graph. >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, a "=" MUST appear between the >> name and >> > > the graph. >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, a "=" MUST NOT appear between >> the name >> > > and the graph. >> > > >> > > * Use of the "graph" keyword, which MUST be used in SPARQL and >> MUST NOT >> > > be used in traditional TriG. >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, the case-insensitive keyword >> "graph" >> > > MAY appear before the name, in a name-graph pair. >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, the case-insensitive keyword >> "graph" >> > > MUST appear before the name, in a name-graph pair. >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, the case-insensitive keyword >> "graph" >> > > MUST NOT appear before the name, in a name-graph pair. >> > > >> > > * Use of curly braces { <a> <b> <c> } around the default graphs. >> They >> > > MUST be used in traditional TriG, and MUST NOT be used in SPARQL. >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, triples of the dataset's default >> graph >> > > MAY be surrounded by curly braces. >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, triples of the dataset's default >> graph >> > > MUST be surrounded by curly braces. >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, triples of the dataset's default >> graph >> > > MUST NOT be surrounded by curly braces. >> > > >> > > * Some designs for carrying for metadata >> > > >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, we'll say that metadata goes in the >> > > default graph >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, we'll say that the default graph >> goes >> > > inside curly braces and the metadata goes outside curly braces >> > > PROPOSED: In our dataset syntax, we'll say that metadata goes >> inside a >> > > set curly braces after a keyword "meta". >> > > PROPOSED: In out dataset syntax, we'll have a keyword "meta" >> followed by >> > > "default" or the name of a named graph, to indicate to readers >> where the >> > > metadata is. >> > > >> > > > -- 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
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2012 19:52:20 UTC