[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] syntactical clarity of datamodels, rdf?
This is likely to strike people as weird, thus my posting it on xml-dev. ;) One of the more popular arguments for RDF of the past few years is the digraph argument, that it provides us a useful datamodel to add to the tabular model, and the hierarchical model. One thing that always irritated me about that was, if I need a language that describes graphs, why not use a language that describes graphs in a syntactically clear manner? This argument exists of course because I have a very difficult time visualising the graph of even a simple rdf instance, whereas I do not have this difficulty with even quite complex instances of Graphml. A couple of days ago I was thinking about this again, and it struck me that not only is the syntax of RDF (in it's xml serialization) ugly, but it is the syntactical lack of clarity vis a vis the data model that is its chief detriment; it seems to me that the languages that succeed with a particular data model represent that model succinctly enough that one could explain the meaning of the structure relatively quickly to a neophyte in the language, note that this is not the same as describing the overall utility of what the model, what it is good for, best practices, but a quick idea can be imparted of how the tables, in most languages supporting tables, 'mean' (I'm actually thinking specifically of J here), and of course in the case of xml it is possible to explain to neophytes some idea of the tree structure fairly quickly, such as explanations as these two instances are generally helped by using graphical displays of the two structures in conjunction with syntax. I do not think that one can easily describe the digraphical nature of RDF, even with a graph at hand. I do believe that parts of RDF are susceptible to such easy explanation, but the whole has not proven to be so, I believe this is why it has basically failed, and why it will continue to fail. Obviously this last bit sounds somewhat religious, as though I have had a conversion, and I suppose I have.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|