Re: EasierRDF

> Nobody denies that URIs as predicates can be useful.  Why is there an
insistence on EVERY predicate being a URI?  What is the logic behind it?
Whose decision was it?

It means that not only can you share data but you can share the metadata
(aka schema / ontology).  This is a big deal. One thing that relational
technology does not support is reusing an existing schema in a new
database.  With every property and class (as well as individual) having its
own globally unique IRI, sharing the ontology becomes trivial.  If you
application and schema and data live in a siloed world and it is
inconceivable that any other application would benefit from having access
to the data or schema, then the benefits of giving properties and classes
plummet.

Michael

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 9:54 AM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 13:24, Frederik Byl <frederik.byl@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear community,
>>
>> I came across the project https://github.com/w3c/EasierRDF. I think it
>> is a good idea to have a look at RDF and the challenges it has. I'm
>> struggling with the use, because the work that is necessary to make systems
>> interoperable by understanding ontologies, formatting the data, extending
>> ontologies, writing queries, etc, is huge! I am a big fan of graph
>> databases and the ease of using Neo4j, Cypher, plain json and writing
>> converters between readable json formats is so much faster and developer
>> friendly. Queries in Cypher are intuitively and can be understood on sight.
>> I am also looking at Solid and I find the approach of data pods extremely
>> interesting and relevant, but the structure is so overwhelming and
>> overcomplicated that I start losing faith in this. Since the project
>> EasierRDF is started, I guess others struggle with the same? Are there some
>> major advantages of using RDF and Sparql over Neo4j and Cypher? We could do
>> linked data with Json-ld and Neo4j?
>>
>
> I came to realize than in 15 years of heavy RDF use, the useful 10% is
> what I use 90% of the time
>
> You might want to look at this one-pager which tries to take some of the
> useful bits of RDF (@id @type @context) and add it to JSON
>
> https://linkedobjects.org/
>
> It is for beginners getting started, and has an upgrade path to JSON-LD
> and full RDF, for those that want it.  It's also compatible with plain old
> JSON, without needing the overhead of creating and maintaining ontologies
> (which let's face it, almost no one does or cares about today)
>
> Use cases and libraries are yet to be built out, but hopefully some food
> for thought
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Frederik
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> Van: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
>> Date: do 10 feb. 2022 om 16:56
>> Subject: Re: EasierRDF
>> To: Frederik Byl <frederik.byl@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>> Hi Frederik,
>>
>> You are asking an excellent question, and I think the community as a
>> whole would benefit from discussing it on a public list, both to get
>> more viewpoints and to expose your question to other existing RDF users.
>>   Would you be willing to post your question to the public
>> semantic-web@w3.org list?
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David Booth
>>
>> On 2/10/22 10:43, Frederik Byl wrote:
>> > Dear David,
>> >
>> > I am sorry to contact you in this straightforward manner. I came across
>> > your project https://github.com/w3c/EasierRDF
>> > <https://github.com/w3c/EasierRDF>. I think it is a good idea to have
>> a
>> > look at RDF and the challenges it has. I'm struggling with the use and
>> > the work that is necessary to make systems interoperable by
>> > understanding ontologies, formatting the data, extending ontologies
>> etc,
>> > is huge! I am a big fan of graph databases and the ease of using Neo4j
>> > and plain json and writing converters between readable json formats is
>> > so much faster and developer friendly. I am also looking at Solid and I
>> > find the approach of data pods extremely interesting and relevant, but
>> > the structure is so overwhelming and overcomplicated that I start
>> losing
>> > faith in this.Since you started the project Easier RDF, I guess you
>> > struggle with the same, or do you see some major advantages in using
>> RDF?
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> > Frederik
>>
>

-- 

Michael Uschold
   Senior Ontology Consultant, Semantic Arts
   http://www.semanticarts.com
   LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/michaeluschold
   Skype, Twitter: UscholdM