- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: 2007年12月18日 15:12:06 +0000
- To: "Chris Richard" <chris.richard@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Steffen Staab" <staab@uni-koblenz.de>, "Peter Ansell" <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, "Fabien Gandon" <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr>, p.roe@qut.edu.au, j.hogan@qut.edu.au, "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <7D2B5F20-9E5A-420D-BC4B-21BFA6031EDF@cyganiak.de>
On 18 Dec 2007, at 14:33, Chris Richard wrote: > Am I fundamentally misguided in believing that RDF/XML provides no > benefits over other text formats like N3 and TriG, other than being, > nominally, XML? XML tool support seems mostly invalidated by the fact > that we're using a format designed to encode hierarchical data to > encode non-hierarchical data. I can't figure out why I might want to > use RDF/XML. Tool support for RDF/XML is better than for N3 or other formats. There is more data available in RDF/XML. It is an official W3C standard. Those are the good things. In every other regard, RDF/XML is a complete and utter train wreck. Adding named graph support to RDF/XML would be polishing a turd. Best, Richard > > > Chris Richard > > > On Dec 18, 2007 6:05 AM, Steffen Staab <staab@uni-koblenz.de> wrote: >> >> Find here some uses (reports and software) described for explicit >> graph >> names: >> >> 1. Networked graphs providing (possibly recursive) views on other >> resources: >> >> https://www.uni-koblenz.de/FB4/Institutes/IFI/AGStaab/Research/NetworkedGraphs >> >> 2. Querying for meta knowledge (provenance, certainty, source >> document, >> etc.), >> which is stated about a graph as a whole (yes, "IRI1 a Graph" would >> be useful here): >> >> https://www.uni-koblenz.de/FB4/Institutes/IFI/AGStaab/Research/MetaKnowledge >> >> Cheers, >> Steffen >> >> Peter Ansell schrieb: >> >>> Just skimming through that submission it is unclear why one would >>> want >>> to publish a document which included sources from multiple different >>> graphs interweaved. Is this document an authoritative reference for >>> the triples from each of the graphs? Could you definitely retrieve >>> the >>> graph source from its original definition and match the definitions? >>> Duplicating information seems to lend itself to hazards with >>> importing >>> two graphs into the same store... >>> >>> It would however be very helpful if it was your desire to augment >>> the >>> original graph without having the authority to do so. >>> >>> Peter >>> >>> On 18/12/2007, Fabien Gandon <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> W3C just published a member submission that may be relevant to this >>>> discussion: >>>> >>>> RDF/XML Source Declaration >>>> Submitted by INRIA on 06 September 2007 >>>> Published on 17 December 2007 >>>> http://www.w3.org/Submission/rdfsource/ >>>> >>>> Submission >>>> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2007/09/ >>>> >>>> W3C Staff Comment >>>> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2007/09/Comment >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Fabien - http://ns.inria.fr/fabien.gandon/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 15:12:22 UTC