- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:16:16 -0400
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
On 03/07/2014 11:20 AM, David Booth wrote: > This google doc lists several candidate terms, some pros and cons, and > allows you to indicate which ones you like best: > http://goo.gl/zrXQgj Thanks to all for the contributions and observations! It is interesting what a variety of terms people have suggested, and I suspect that this is not entirely good, as it means that people learning about RDF are probably getting an inconsistent message as we describe it in such different ways. Some consolidation in the way we talk about it would probably help, though I don't think we need 100% uniformity. FWIW, for a short adjective phrase that I can use as a bullet item on a technical slide -- one that completes the sentence: "RDF is ________________" -- I think I will go with the phrase: "Multi-schema friendly" And for explaining this benefit in the least technical way, I particularly like Hugh Glaser's suggestion: "Supports multiple overlapping vocabularies" Please feel free to continue to add suggestions or vote for your favorites: http://goo.gl/zrXQgj Thanks! David Booth
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2014 15:16:44 UTC