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

Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: SemanticWeb per

• To: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: SemanticWeb permathread, iteration n+1
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 01:26:59 -0400
• In-reply-to: <20040608050111.GA14122@m...>
• References: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D102766E79@R...> <20040608050111.GA14122@m...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Windows/20040502)

Mark Baker wrote:
> 
> RDF provides an evolutionary story for XML; it enables to-be-developed
> software to process old documents, and old software to process
> yet-to-be-authored documents.

Maybe yes, maybe no.  In the sense that the triples would be there, yes. 
  But in real, complex applications, I think that structures of triples 
will almost always play an important role.  I call them "idioms".  It is 
highly unlikely that unspecialized software will be able to make use of 
those idioms.  In this way the older software may not be able to make 
good use of the newer documents.  In general, the generalized software 
may not be able to use the idioms effectively.

Let's say, for example, that I develop a fairly complex topic map, 
making use of a lot of topic map features.  I can most likely translate 
this to an RDF graph (unless it deals with making statements about 
subgraphs).  But a general RDF processor will have no notion of what to 
do with, say, scopes or instanceOf relationships.  It will produce the 
right triples, but that won't be enough.

If this picture is right, RDF won't offer as much evolutionary oomph as 
you expect.

Cheers,

Tom P

-- 
Thomas B. Passin
Explorer's Guide to the Semantic Web (Manning Books)
http://www.manning.com/catalog/view.php?book=passin

• References:
  • RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Next by Date: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: SemanticWeb permathread, iteration n+1
• Previous by thread: Re: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Next by thread: RE: The triples datamodel -- was Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread