- From: <franklin.reynolds@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 12:17:24 -0600
- To: david@megginson.com, xml-dev@xml.org, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Greg FitzPatrick writes: > > [about RDF] > > > > Throwing more standards writers at a problem is like > > > throwing more > > > money at one (or like adding more people to a > > > software-development > > > project that's behind schedule). > > > So like .. er, we shouldn't do anything at all? > > Well, sort-of. Let's wait a while and see what the implementors come > up with, and then standardize *after* we have real-world experience > rather than trying to do it in advance. > I think the community needs: 1. RDF equivalents of DOM and SAX. These should be simple, graph oriented APIs. Ideally these APIs and tools that realise those APIs would make RDF more accessible to average programmers. Reasonable candidate APIs may exist but they have not been endorsed by the community or by a major tool vendor (Microsoft) so their value to most programmers is somewhat limited. 2. Intellectually accessible tutorials for typical web programmers with lots of examples would be a good thing. I don't think the core of RDF is particularly difficult, but concepts like reification are foreign to most web programmers. Anything that makes it easier for programmers to "get it" would help. Just my two cents... Franklin Reynolds Nokia Research Center
Received on Friday, 25 February 2000 13:19:17 UTC