Re: One-page tutorial on RDF

At 11:35 AM 12/20/00 +0000, Graham Klyne wrote:
>I find myself more often being asked to present RDF in simple terms:  here 
>is something I put together recently in response to one such question. 
>Broadly, RDF maps a directed labelled graph (DLG) data model onto 
>XML.  The graph nodes and arcs are labelled using URIs.

I don't mean any disrespect but if you think that opener (let alone what 
follows) qualifies as "simple terms" we are living on different planets. If 
the people asking can understand what you've presented, they shouldn't have 
been asking. There are billions of people out there for whom "maps a DLG" 
seem like lunatic ravings and "graph nodes and arcs" a recipe for confusion 

I am sure that we all know we speak "arcania" but I wonder if it's possible 
to translate on-the-fly for some audience that doesn't already know what is 
dreamt of and how it's to be done.

Why is it important to reach entry-level Web authors (and on up the scale 
of initiation completions) to this stuff? Because there will be cost 
involved and they will mostly be paying it.

They must learn: what the concept of structure/content/presentation 
separation (or even *existence*) means and why it matters; why they should 
do that separation and also provide such indexing aids as summaries and 
fragIDs to help machines access their work; how to do these things.

When I throw a mess like this on the table I am obliged to show some effort 
at cleaning it up - so here's what I've done to date in this regard: - an attempt to "present RDF in simple terms" - an exposition of why authoring/browsing/indexing are 
inseparably interwoven - a simple tool for RDF inclusion in XHTML files (by Sean 
B. Palmer) - a position paper attempting to 
relate device independence issues with the Semantic Web



Received on Wednesday, 20 December 2000 09:00:24 UTC