- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:10:55 +0100
- To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Danny Ayers wrote: > Out in RSS land the line remains reasonably clear between those who > appreciate the benefit of using RDF and those who don't. One of the > problems is that as new vocabularies come available, even those that > are specifically designed for use with RSS, there often isn't any > visible advance in functionality. When things like partial > understanding through inference are mentioned in this environment the > response often includes the expression "smoking crack". But if there > were a single (though presumably modular), figurehead app in which > there was tangible evidence of utility, maybe people would be less > concerned about the physical appearance of the interchange syntax... I agree that something big and killer-appish could go a long way helping RDF in this area, but I am not certain that the W3C is the best avenue for that. What advantages does it have over an open source project to do the same thing, hosted elsewhere but with active participation from RDF people from inside W3C? -- Robin Berjon
Received on Sunday, 28 November 2004 16:11:05 UTC