- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 08:12:53 -0400
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
Hi Martynas, On 7/1/20 7:44 AM, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > Why do you assume that developers are the end-users of RDF? I want average developers to be able to create applications that use RDF, just as easily as they currently create applications that use JSON or XML. This is *necessary* if RDF is to be adopted in use cases that require widespread adoption. RDF is currently a niche technology. I'd like it to become more than that. > And that the arbitrary 33% of them should be using it? I think RDF is currently too elitist. I want to change that, and that means making it easier for *average* developers, because statistically it is not possible to have everybody above average. > What is this assumption based on? If that is what EasierRDF rests on, > I'm afraid it's misguided from the start. > > You further conflate "user experience" with "developer experience". Sorry, I probably should have written "developer" sometimes when I wrote "user". > RDF-driven systems can be flexible enough to expose the features RDF > enables through a UI, without exposing the RDF itself (primitive > example: Google structured search results). That is what we should > aspire to build. Agreed. > Not the best example, but in a sense this is similar to us using > telecommunications everyday which are built with Erlang, without > realizing that. You don't expect 33% of developers to learn Erlang > because of that, do you? If you are arguing that it is okay that RDF is too hard for most developers -- that they shouldn't be trying to use RDF anyway -- then I completely disagree. If RDF remains as a niche, elitist technology I think it will eventually die out, as it is overtaken by other graph technologies whose capabilities will steadily expand and eventually cover RDF's use cases. I would rather see RDF evolve toward becoming higher level, easier to use, and become more mainstream. > If I were you, I would be fuming at universities that teach a 40-year > old programming curriculum, rather than at a set of well established > and widely deployed standards. I'm not angry at the RDF standards! I've been an RDF advocate for *many* years, and I want it to grow and thrive instead of dying out. David Booth
Received on Wednesday, 1 July 2020 12:13:07 UTC