Re: RDF 2 Wishlist

Am 01.11.2009 um 18:51 schrieb Sandro Hawke:

> So, what should W3C standardize next in the area of RDF, if anything?
> OWL 2 added a bunch of stuff to OWL that users wanted and  
> implementors were willing to tackle.  Are there things like that  
> around RDF?

A notion of context or scope (or at least named graphs).

I found these slides very convincing:

Would probably also solve Adrians problem.


> My own answer is in a recent blog post:
> What's yours?
> Two quick caveats:
>   * W3C takes backward compatibility very seriously.  If you're
>     proposing something that doesn't have a solid migration story,
>     please call it something else, something that doesn't look like
>     it's taking over from RDF.  Serious proposals should allow
>     existing data-consumer and data-producer systems to keep working,
>     with only gentle pressure for upgrading as people want to
>     interoperate with the new features.
>   * While public input (like this) is welcome, and good for laying
>     out the options, to actually have a seat at the table in deciding
>     what W3C does next, an organization has to join W3C and help pay
>     the bills.  See for
>     details.  Argue facts and designs here, but priorities there.
> Thanks.
>    -- Sandro (W3C staff contact for RIF, OWL, SPARQL, eGov)

Received on Sunday, 1 November 2009 20:11:30 UTC