[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic

• To: <uche.ogbuji@f...>,"Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
• Subject: RE: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic
• From: "Shelley Powers" <shelleyp@b...>
• Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 08:59:17 -0600
• Cc: "patrick hayes" <phayes@a...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <E18EVsX-0000x8-00@m...>

>
> > Please, if you are writing a book about RDF, don't say these
> things because
> > you are just going to confuse anyone and everyone who believes
> what you say.
> > You have a particular obligation to thouroughly read
> > http://www.w3.org/rdf-mt/ . It is a very well written document.
>
> I haven't read the latest draft of that document, but I share
> your worry about
> what Shelley's book might say about reification and containers.
>
> I ceased using both ages ago because, as many here have pointed
> out, they are
> terribly B.A.D.  People cannot be forbidden from using them
> because in the end
> they are just regular triples with no special status (i.e. using
> predicates
> such as "rdf:subject" and "_1".  But I am glad that in earlier
> drafts of post
> RDF-1.0, that even their status in the serialization has been
> stripped.  I
> also think that daml:Collection (which I understand has been
> drafted into RDF)
> is a much better solution for containers, if not perfect.  For
> things that RDF
> M&S originally suggested as applications of reification, as I've said, I
> instead use blank node constructs or 4RDF scopes.
>
> My main point is that if any RDF book covers reification and
> containers, it
> should at least tell the user about the very widely expressed warnings
> problems with these constructs, and the fact that many RDF
> experts avoid them.
>  Endless discussion on such topics can be found in the www-rdf-interest
> archives.
>
> Let's not lead RDF newbies into that foetid sinkhole.
>

Such concerns for my readers from both you and Jonathan. Warms my heart.

Some things I've learned from my efforts on several computer books:

-give people facts, examples, information, and pointers to additional
sources of same
-present an unbiased viewpoint of the technology
-be as accurate as humanly possible
-admit mistakes where made and rectify
-answer the questions the readers have before they ask them
-never talk down to the reader, but never make unwarranted assumptions
-in a scale of intelligence, with an amoeba is at one end and Einstein at
the other, put your readers in the middle

And, above all, keep discussions of politics for books contained in the
section titled "Books on Politics".

Shelley

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• References:
  • Re: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?
• Next by Date: Re: What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?
• Previous by thread: Re: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic
• Next by thread: Re: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomatic
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread