- From: Leonid Ototsky <leo@mmk.ru>
- Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 11:20:09 +0600
- To: MDaconta@aol.com
- CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Hello,Collegues Suppose "the struggle" connected with insufficient deep grounds used ! Look at the "To keep abreast of the 21st century" paper http://ototsky.mgn.ru/it/21abreast.htm Best regards, Leonid mailto:leo@mmk.ru and copy to leo@mgn.ru ===================================================== Leonid Ototsky, http://ototsky.mgn.ru Chief Specialist of the Computer Center, Magnitogorsk Iron&Steel Works (MMK)- www.mmk.ru Russia ===================================================== Thursday, October 03, 2002, 11:11:46 PM, you wrote: Mac> Return-Path: <www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org> Mac> Received: from antivirus.mmk.ru (relgate.man.mmk.chel.su [161.8.27.2]) by relgate.mmk.ru (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g93LNWPh031020 for <leo@mmk.ru>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 03:23:32 +0600 (YEKST) Mac> (envelope-from www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org) Mac> Received: from mx.mmk.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus.mmk.ru (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g93L9WE07476 for <leo@mmk.ru>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 02:09:32 +0500 (ESK) Mac> Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [18.29.1.71]) by mx.mmk.ru (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g93LCflK065446 for <leo@mmk.ru>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 03:12:43 +0600 (YEKST) (envelope-from Mac> www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org) Mac> Received: (from lists@localhost) by frink.w3.org (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) id g93LCr900452; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:12:53 -0400 (EDT) Mac> Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:12:53 -0400 (EDT) Mac> Resent-Message-Id: <200210032112.g93LCr900452@frink.w3.org> Mac> Received: from tux.w3.org (tux.w3.org [18.29.0.27]) by frink.w3.org (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g93LCdB00383 for <www-rdf-interest@frink.w3.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:12:39 -0400 (EDT) Mac> Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by tux.w3.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA17773 for <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:12:39 -0400 Mac> From: MDaconta@aol.com Mac> Received: from MDaconta@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.159.153fd936 (1320) for <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:11:46 -0400 (EDT) Mac> Message-ID: <159.153fd936.2ace0c92@aol.com> Mac> Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 17:11:46 EDT Mac> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org Mac> MIME-Version: 1.0 Mac> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_159.153fd936.2ace0c92_boundary" Mac> X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10630 Mac> Subject: The Tragedy of RSS Mac> Resent-From: www-rdf-interest@w3.org Mac> X-Mailing-List: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org> archive/latest/7098 Mac> X-Loop: www-rdf-interest@w3.org Mac> Sender: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org Mac> Resent-Sender: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org Mac> Precedence: list Mac> List-Id: <www-rdf-interest.w3.org> Mac> List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/> Mac> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe> Mac> Status: Mac> After seeing this article Mac> http://bitworking.org/wellformed.html on XML Hack and Mac> reading links for several hours (and some digression), I Mac> arrived at these facts: Mac> 1. RSS 0.90 - RDF Site Summary developed by Dan Libby. Mac> 2. RSS 0.91 - Rich Site Summary developed by Dan Libby as a Mac> compromise to achieve validation and simplicity. Mac> 3. RSS 0.92, 0.93, 0.9* Rich Site Summary developed by Dave Winer. Mac> 4. RSS 1.0 - RDF Site Summary reintroduces RDF for syndication. Mac> 5. RSS 2.0 - Real Simple Syndication developed by Dave Winer. Mac> 6. ??? Mac> It is obvious there is literally a competition over the syndication Mac> problem domain between RDF and an application of XML Schema. Mac> Besides the tragic tug of war over who's solution is "better" - I Mac> believe the real tragedy is RDF losing a battle that it should not Mac> have fought. I believe that Dave Winer, wielding the "simplicity Mac> sledgehammer", will defeat RDF as a more widely adopted Mac> solution to simple syndication. The bottom line will be that Mac> RSS 2.0 is simpler than RSS 1.0 and since RDF still cannot Mac> prove the value of its additional complexity -- simplicity wins. Mac> In other words, if you take away (or discount) the "it will enable Mac> a wonderfully semantic future" (safely procrastinated away) -- you Mac> have no technical arguments that can stand up to being bludgeoned Mac> by the simplicity and "time is money" argument. Mac> So, why is RDF in this fight? I think RDF is a misnomer. It should not be Mac> called the Resource Description Framework as that is only one Mac> target for its function and not the best one. It is obvious that Mac> RDF can be used to describe more than just electronic resources Mac> and knowledge representation is also more than just description (e.g. Mac> assertion). A more accurate name would be "Knowledge Graph Mac> Language" (KGL). Although I do not know the history behind the Mac> name RDF (if you do please post it), I believe it narrowly (and thus Mac> incorrectly) characterizes the language. Why would you hinder a Mac> language with such a name? I believe the name is a gimmick, like Mac> java applets, to slip knowledge representation into the web without too Mac> much friction with the more mature SGML/DTD/XML/Schema data Mac> representation world. In fact, some rationalize the RDF in RSS 1.0 as Mac> a good "wedge" into widespread use. But unfortunately, many RSS Mac> implementors and developers believe that the syntactic overhead is Mac> not worth it. Mac> So, if you change the name -- you can concentrate on the bigger Mac> fish like: Mac> 1. KGL (formerly RDF) as the basis for OWL. Mac> 2. Being able to easily embed KGL statements in existing XML data. Mac> 3. Make the KGL serialization syntax approach N3 simplicity. Mac> If you don't change the name, the W3C must fight tooth and nail to Mac> keep RDF in RSS in terms of adoption as "resource description" would then Mac> be your "main game". Of course, if MS, IBM, Sun or Oracle adopt RSS 2.0 Mac> (or both) that will be an uphill (and probably futile) battle. Anyone know Mac> what Microsoft thinks of RDF? Are Microsofties and Dave Winer SOAP Mac> buddies? (pun intended) ;) Mac> Why am I worried abouth this? Mac> I do not want this to be a foreshadow of the larger struggle to achieve Mac> the semantic web ("the war"). Because if the RSS battle is painted as Mac> a "Utopian Complexity" (RDF) versus "Real World Simplicity" (Real Simple Mac> Syndication) -- RDF will lose. A few RSS type defeats and the semantic Mac> web war will be seen in the same "utopian" light. So, I can live with Mac> the tragedy of RDF Site Summary if it avoids the tragedy of the Mac> Semantic Web. Mac> Does anyone else hear the cannon shots across the bow Mac> of the SS Semantic Web? Mac> - Mike Mac> ---------------------------------------------------- Mac> Michael C. Daconta Mac> Director, Web & Technology Services Mac> www.mcbrad.com
Received on Friday, 4 October 2002 03:17:59 UTC