W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > June 2013

RE: The need for RDF in Linked Data

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:44:06 +0200
To: <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <018e01ce6c43$0d444670$27ccd350$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:33 PM, David Booth wrote:
> On 06/18/2013 05:58 AM, Norman Gray wrote:
> > I've given a couple of lectures on 'the semantic web and linked data'
> > to librarians/archivists/museum people.  They're interested^Wobsessed
> > by structured information, but largely uninterested in technology as
> > such.  They rather glaze when I talk about RDF and ontologies, but
> > they _get_ Linked Data when I phrase it as 'the linked data web is
> > the web for machines; it has the same good/bad/pragmatic
> > sociotechnical features as the human-readable web, but because it's
> > all RDF rather than all HTML, the machines can follow their noses
> > just like we can on the human-readable web'.
> >
> > Phrased like that, or something like it, they can imagine its use in
> > their practice, and why it's important.
> 
> Yes!  I could not agree more, except for one point.  The reason this
> debate arose was because a W3C technical specification -- the JSON-LD
> spec -- was proposing to include a *definition* of Linked Data.  And
> that is very different than trying to convey a rough idea of Linked
> Data to a non-technical audience.

Just for the record. We didn't try to include a *definition* - or at least
that was not the intention. We paraphrased the Linked Data principles in the
non-normative introduction. That's all.. Anyway, with David's help we now
agreed on an alternative text which we all are equally (un)happy.



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2013 16:44:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:33 UTC