RE: Dons flame resistant (3 hours) interface about Linked Data URIs

> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Dan Brickley
> Sent: vendredi 10 juillet 2009 12:33
> To: Juan Sequeda
> Cc: Steve Harris; Richard Light; semantic-web at W3C;
> Subject: Re: Dons flame resistant (3 hours) interface about Linked
> URIs
> On 10/7/09 12:23, Juan Sequeda wrote:
> > Steve is right.
> >
> > If I am not wrong, when TBL gave his talk at CERN for the 20th
> > aniversary of the web, he said that he was amazed that people were
> > hacking HTML by hand. He never expected it.
> >
> > Now... we are the geeks doing RDF, conneg, linked data by hand... In
> a
> > couple of years we will create tools for the non-geeks
> >
> > We have to learn from our history and not get ahead of ourselves.
> RDF has been a W3C Recommendation since February, 1999.  The RDF work
> went public in Oct 1997.
> A lot has happened since then...

[PFB] Well, it hasn't, that's exactly the problem. Most people - geeks
and non-geeks alike - "got" HTML and HTTP very quickly as most posters
have already stated. Bluntly put: if RDF is the answer, why ten years
down the line is the take up still so poor compared with html?

There *has* to be a serious debate about subject identity and resources
being distinct or this sort of debate will continue for another ten
years, all the while more and more people are lulled into a false sense
of security by the semweb bulldozer and try to build stable
infrastructure upon fatally flawed architectural design principles...

Remember: Tantalus also thought that going after low-hanging fruit was a
neat idea.

> Definitely we've done a lot of hacker-grade stuff in the meantime. But
> tools for going mainstream are getting overdue! Even tools for
> developers: eg. regular Redland builds on Windows; a solid packaged
> Ruby
> library, etc.
> Re tools for publishing, given the fiddlyness of doing RDF right, my
> vote is for everything that allows tools on one site to post RDF into
> another. I've suggested before that AtomPub + OAuth would be a
> plausible
> starting point, but I'm open to suggestions.
> Re non-geeks, is a must-
> watch...
> cheers,
> Dan

Received on Friday, 10 July 2009 19:33:01 UTC