RDF Modules

[Robin Berjon]

On Feb 14, 2008, at 11:45, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
>> RDF is conceptually simple, elegant and expressive. It reminds me
> ofLISP.
>
> Yes, but the XML syntax is tiresome. It reminds of LISP written  
> like this:
>
> <clause>defun factorial <arg>http://www.w3.org/arguments#n</arg>
>   <clause>if <arg>= http://www.w3.org/arguments#n 1</arg>
>       1
>       <clause>* http://www.w3.org/arguments#n <clause>factorial <arg>-
> http://www.w3.org/arguments#n 1</arg></clause></clause></clause></ 
> clause>

Yeah, but then you don't have to use it. There are plenty of  
alternative syntaxes, n-triples, turtle, n3, etc. that are much nicer  
(and also parse better).

>> However, I suspect that it'll take another 20 years for it (or  
>> something
>> like it) to become widely used.
>
> We've just bought a large authentication/authorisation product that  
> uses
> RDF internally for all it's customer and account metadata.  
> Admittedly this
> is a niche product even by technical publishing standards, but it's
> starting to creep in. I don't think they are doing anything you  
> couldn't
> do more traditionally, but it's interesting to see the adoption.

It's rarely a question of what couldn't be done traditionally, it's  
more about the way in which you do it. The open universe approach  
that RDF takes is IMHO one of its niceties.

>> So the Semantic (with a large 'S') Web probably isn't happening  
>> any time
>> soon... but that shouldn't stop you from creating your own semantic
>> applications.

No reason you can't use both at the same time though :)

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A no-name place, as far as I could see, but it had a miserable
  café-cum-garage-cum-funeral parlour shared by a gang of silent
  locals and many flies who wheeled through the air like drugged
  angels of death."
                         -- David Mitchell, Cloud Atlas