• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Why RDF is hard
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
• Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 17:57:57 -0500

I've said RDF is simple, it's basically just

[node] ---arc---> [node]

or in N-triples form:

subject predicate object .

for example, note that nodes are named by URIrefs, stuff inside <..> is a
URIref, and QNames are converted to URIrefs:

<http://example.org/foo#XSD> rddl:purpose
<http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation> .
<http://example.org/foo#XSD> rddl:related <http://www.example.org/foo.xsd> .

but RDF gets hard fast. That's because the problems that RDF can be used to
solve might be very tricky problems. It's not that RDF *itself* is so
complicated, it's that its problem domain (e.g. unstructured databases or
"knowledge representation") is complicated.

This might be a good explanation:
http://slashdot.org/~Jack%20William%20Bell/journal/16717

Jonathan

http://www.jonathanborden-md.com
http://www.erieneurosurgery.com
http://www.openhealth.org

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Why RDF is hard
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• Next by Date: Re: RDF in 500 words
• Previous by thread: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• Next by thread: Re: Why RDF is hard
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread