W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0"

From: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 07:08:25 +0100
Message-ID: <4B4EB4D9.8040506@gmail.com>
To: "Lynn, James (HP Software Professional Services)" <james.lynn@hp.com>
CC: Marco <marco.neumann@gmail.com>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi,
what you are asking is about usage and adoption of specific RDF
vocabularies (ontologies or schemes), not about RDF itself.

Maybe it would be good if Chris said precisely if he is looking for
positions on which directions the whole Semantic Web effort should take,
or specifically RDF. My impression is the second case (and I expressed
myself in previous thread already
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2009Nov/0066.html ).

Best,
Jiri Prochazka


On 01/14/2010 02:36 AM, Lynn, James (HP Software Professional Services)
wrote:
> Hi Marco,
> 
> Nothing specific, more of an open question. I should point out that I have drifted from involvement in RDF (daytime job and all that) so of everyone on this list I am probably the most out of touch with the “current situation” regarding the place of RDF in the world.
> 
> Here’s a question that may spark some conversation. RDF can certainly express many things that are “good to know” about web services. David Booth gives several examples in this presentation:
> RDF as a Lingua Franca: Architectural Strategies<http://www.dbooth.org/2009/stc/dbooth-SemTechConf-2009.ppt> (slides from Semantic Technology Conference 2009, San Jose)
> 
> The question I raise is, will RDF become a standard way to express that information. Will I be able to say something about a web service I post in the Cloud somewhere and will everyone understand it – or even know where to find it because it is in RDF embedded in some standard way in a WSDL, Policy, etc.? Obviously, I’m not expecting a simple answer so much as perhaps a discussion about what RDF’s status is in the community and what roadblocks – technical or political may lie ahead.
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> Jim
> 
> From: Marco [mailto:marco.neumann@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 8:12 PM
> To: Lynn, James (HP Software Professional Services)
> Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0"
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> can you please elaborate a little on the first boat RDF missed?
> 
> Is this allegory only based on measuring wide adoption (eg use in RSS) or do you have other indicators in mind?
> 
> Marco
> 
> Sent from my mobile device
> 
> On Jan 13, 2010, at 7:53 PM, "Lynn, James (HP Software Professional Services)" <james.lynn@hp.com<mailto:james.lynn@hp.com>> wrote:
> In addition to what I am sure is a long list of issues already on your table (Chris), I’d like to ask “what’s the goal?” What role do people see RDF playing at this point even if all ills were cured? Would there be a place in RSS for RDF? How about annotating WSDLs, WS-Policy, WS-*? I don’t mean to sound pessimistic but I do worry that RDF may have missed the boat. When does the next boat leave?
> 
> Jim
> 
> James Lynn
> 
> Consulting Manager
> Application Lifecycle Management
> Application Security • Quality Management • SOA Governance
> 
> Software Professional Services
> Hewlett-Packard Company
> 
> Tel : +1.484.239.7535
> 
> 


Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 06:09:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:04 UTC