- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:35:29 -0000
- To: "Wolfram Conen" <conen@wi-inf.uni-essen.de>
- Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> What problems did you/do you see that require an RDF-like solution? Anything that needs metadata... one good example use is EDL/EARL [1]. And then there's for use in the Semantic Web... > Have you been able to use RDF to solve the problems? Well, yes. If there is a problem that requires an RDF-like solution, why not use RDF? The M&S spec. isn't all that complicated, so it is very easy to implement, and there are quite a few parsers and APIs out there. One good use was in the SWAG Vocabulary where I used CWM to find out who coined which terms - that really brought home the power of semantics to me. > What are the key features of RDF that you like? Are there features you > don't like? What is missing (and why?) I like it's simplicity: node and arc, and another node. Subject, predicate, object. Its power lies in its simplicity at the basic level. Of course, ontologies and logic should have been built into it in complementary specifications... as part of a suite of RDF. > [Evolution] > RDF2.0? At first I didn't think there would be much need for an RDF 2.0, but N3 really opened my eyes. I simply don't write anything in XML RDF now unless I need to process it as such. Seth's semEnglish also has great potential. I think RDF 2.0, as there surely needs to be one, should be much better defined for a start: how big is the 1.0 errata now?, and should have more key features. Ontologies, and perhaps even logic should come as part of the package... but modular of course. But the main thing is scribblability and ease of use. It's too rigid at the moment. > Will RDF play a key role in the upcoming "Semantic Web"? Of course! The whole Semantic Web is based on triples at the base level - have you seen TimBL's architecture diagrams? But of course, this isn't limited to XML RDF, or even N3. It's limited to *RDF* which is the basic assertion model. Anything like that as long as you can build the more complex SW stuff on top of it - Schemas, Ontologies, Logic, etc. [1] EDL/EARL: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/#earl and http://infomesh.net/edl/ -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2001 11:37:30 UTC